Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 12:16:14 +0200 From: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> To: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Splitting devel/subversion into SEVERAL ports -- how fine-grained do we want to see it? Message-ID: <20140608121614.18ab5996@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> In-Reply-To: <1438330868.20140608001618@serebryakov.spb.ru> References: <1438330868.20140608001618@serebryakov.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 00:16:18 +0400 Lev Serebryakov wrote:
> Hello, Ports.
>
> I've learned proper way to split subversion into several ports. Question
> is: how fine-grained should I do this? I want to split it at least into:
>
> (1) devel/subversion-libs -- base libs, used by all other ports. Options
> about SERF, BDB and SASL goes here.
> (2) devel/subversion-client -- all base tools, like "svn", "svnversion" and
> so on, but not "svnserve".
> (3) devel/subversion-server -- svnserve binary.
> (4) devel/subversion-tools -- additional tools (option now).
> (5) devel/subversion-apache -- all mod_dav_svn-related stuff.
> (6) devel/subversion-gnome -- GNOME KEyRing integration (option now).
> (7) devel/subversion-kde -- KDE KWallet integration (option now).
> (8) devel/subversion -- meta-port with options (and real stuff, like
> patches and all infrastructure).
>
> But it is possible to extract more options to separate ports: BDB repository
> format, remote access with "svn:" scheme and SERF support ("http:" scheme
> remote access) could be separate ports (and packages), not options! But
> maybe, it is "too much" already?
I don't want to stop you from doing this, but if I were you I'd just
wait for subpackages support. You may want to merge all those ports
back into one port then.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140608121614.18ab5996>