Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:20:02 -0600 From: Jie Gao <jeffgaofreebsd@gmail.com> To: Tillman Hodgson <tillman@seekingfire.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/www is too full Message-ID: <639522fe04102616204f74bf14@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20041026194725.GR94897@seekingfire.com> References: <20041022074529.GN10363@k7.mavetju> <639522fe04102612404109e5e7@mail.gmail.com> <20041026194725.GR94897@seekingfire.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
They are different if we do not have powerful search utilities. But when we have good search tools both searching and browsing will benefit from it. Look at the WWW search engines (google, yahoo, ...). Almost all of them have web site directories, which are for browsing but benefit a lot from the search technologies. If we have good logical categories for the ports, and have good indexing and searching tools, it does not matter where the ports are physically put. And surely a better interface for browsing can be built on top of that. On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:47:25 -0600, Tillman Hodgson <tillman@seekingfire.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 01:40:09PM -0600, Jie Gao wrote: > > I agree this. If we have a powerful search utility instead of the > > simple "make search", it doesn't matter how large the directories are. > > Searching and browsing are not the same task. > > /me has an image of window-shopping the ports tree ... > > -T > > -- > Real men use "cat /var/spool/mail/$USER | more" and "telnet $SMTP_HOST 25" > - Anonymous Unix geek > "more /var/spool/mail/$USER" <-- don't waste a process, you idiot > - Second anonymous Unix geek > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?639522fe04102616204f74bf14>