Re: java/eclipse and jdk1.6

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 08:06:07PM -0600, Mark Linimon
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:12:03AM -0800, Greg Lewis
wrote:
> > A good argument for this is that it has lead to
things like the Eclipse
> > plugin for PHP (insert any language other than
Java) being in the java
> > category.  Thats just plain ridiculous in my
view.
> 
> My own feeling is that the 'java' physical category has
not been a success.
> People are too confused about where to put things. 
It's the only language-
> specific physical category we have.

Agreed.  Its a mess.  Stuff ends up in there just because
its written in
Java.  Other equivalent ports (which may or may not be
written in Java)
end up in other categories.  I wouldn't be sad to see it go.
 We could
easily do something like have it as a virtual category ala
perl, etc.
and possibly also prefix port names with java- if people
thought that was
a good idea.

> As for how/what on creating a new physical category,
see
> http://www.freebsd.org/do
c/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/ports.html#AEN15
29
> (it will also refer you to the relevant section of the
Porter's Handbook).
> 
> I think it's a fairly easy call to have 'eclipse'
created as a virtual
> category.  There was a proposal a year or so ago to
create some kind of
> 'ide' physical category for Integrated Development
Environments of
> various kinds, but it quickly resulted in more
controversy than anything
> else.  (IIRC I was against it at the time.)  I'd want
to see a complete
> proposed list before we went in that direction.

I don't believe a physical category is warranted, but I
agree that a
virtual category is pretty much a given if it were to move
(or even if
it didn't that makes some sense).

> Mass category moves are stressful for our users IMHO,
so we should only
> use them if we really feel the hierarchy will be in
much better shape
> going forwards.

So thats the big question.  If we leave the category there
it will continue
to gather new ports despite our best intentions for what we
want people to
commit there.  We know that this will cause confusion since
it leaves users
unsure of where they should look for certain ports.  Do we
think that level
of confusion is a greater pain than the pain of gutting the
category
(either over time or in one hit).

-- 
Greg Lewis                          Email   : glewiseyesbeyond.com
Eyes Beyond                         Web     : http://www.eyesbeyond.com
Information Technology              FreeBSD : glewisFreeBSD.org
_______________________________________________
freebsd-javafreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java

To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-java-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

Greg Lewis wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 08:06:07PM -0600, Mark Linimon
wrote:
>> Mass category moves are stressful for our users
IMHO, so we should only
>> use them if we really feel the hierarchy will be in
much better shape
>> going forwards.
> 
> So thats the big question.  If we leave the category
there it will continue
> to gather new ports despite our best intentions for
what we want people to
> commit there.  We know that this will cause confusion
since it leaves users
> unsure of where they should look for certain ports.  Do
we think that level
> of confusion is a greater pain than the pain of gutting
the category
> (either over time or in one hit).
> 

If I may... I don't believe that it's going to get any
better over 
time... so if not now, when?  Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan
of 
confusion, but in the long run the intention is to improve
clarity.

Mike.


-------
The standard IMHO disclaimer applies to any statements I may
or may not 
have made above.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-javafreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-java

To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-java-unsubscribefreebsd.org"