From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri May  8 15:20:56 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB9F61065680;
	Fri,  8 May 2009 15:20:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABA548FC1B;
	Fri,  8 May 2009 15:20:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua)
Received: from odyssey.starpoint.kiev.ua (alpha-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
	[212.40.38.101])
	by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id SAA21724;
	Fri, 08 May 2009 18:20:54 +0300 (EEST)
	(envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua)
Message-ID: <4A044DD5.8030209@icyb.net.ua>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 18:20:53 +0300
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090406)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Noland <rnoland@FreeBSD.org>
References: <4A01C995.1080808@icyb.net.ua> <86hbzwvzsd.fsf@chateau.d.lf>	
	<4A03F50B.6050908@icyb.net.ua> <86tz3v6d44.fsf@chateau.d.lf>	
	<4A0430F6.4080202@icyb.net.ua>
	<1241795208.1733.8.camel@balrog.2hip.net>
In-Reply-To: <1241795208.1733.8.camel@balrog.2hip.net>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-U
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ashish SHUKLA <wahjava@gmail.com>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: split xcbgen from xcb-proto
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 15:20:58 -0000

on 08/05/2009 18:06 Robert Noland said the following:
> 
> I think that a slave port is ok in this case.  As long as dependencies
> can be cleanly tracked and it doesn't produce conflicts.  Meaning that
> the user shouldn't have to select one port over the other.

Right. One port should complement the other, not be its alternative.

-- 
Andriy Gapon