Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 17:11:57 -0700 From: Rob Farmer <rfarmer@predatorlabs.net> To: utisoft@gmail.com Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>, Li-Wen Hsu <lwhsu@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/java/jgraphx Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <AANLkTik8O4fpVHU%2B_pFGTRBapTtMx%2B5fJgk4M8QnZsCw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinnsfdVVRi39HEp24bXMM2ykWydnmt%2BiEdDSqHH@mail.gmail.com> References: <201008221158.o7MBwce6093897@repoman.freebsd.org> <AANLkTinwzkmw3%2BkSjddODtzFSCD-5RBb1gU48%2BM6w58E@mail.gmail.com> <20100827062503.GA85184@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTinnsfdVVRi39HEp24bXMM2ykWydnmt%2BiEdDSqHH@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> wrote: > 2010/8/27 Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>: >> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 09:53:32PM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote: >>> This breaks math/scilab (which is the only dependency in the ports >>> tree). Unfortunately, the author of jgraphx seems to completely >>> disregard backwards compatibility and changes the API in virtually >>> every release. >>> >>> I tried to patch Scilab based on their git repository (which has >>> support for 1.4.0.1), but hundreds of revisions have passed and they >>> have rearranged their tree a bit and added/removed some files, so it >>> didn't go well. >>> >>> IMHO, we need to either create a separate jgraphx-scilab port or keep >>> this in sync with Scilab (this is what Debian, Ubuntu, and Gentoo are >>> doing). >> >> Considering Scilab is the only consumer of jgraphx, it seems having >> special port would be an overkill. =A0I think we should keep the two in >> sync, and probably work with upstream maintainers of both projects to >> improve compatibility and API inheritance in the future. =A0Separate por= t >> of jgraphx-scilab is palliative solution, i.e. it simply increases the >> entropy, not solving the underlying problem. >> >> ./danfe > > > Since Scilab is the only consumer of jgraphx, I don't mind reverting it. > > Actually, I wrote that while trying to repair Scilab myself, so if you > want maintainership of jgraphx too, that's fine. I don't want to feel like I'm stealing your ports, but I do think it would be a good idea to have them maintained together. > > Alternatively you could have it as another distfile in Scilab rather > than depending on the port.... I hadn't thought about this, but it may actually be the best solution - as far as I'm aware, the reason for having libraries in separate ports is to allow multiple applications to use the same copy, but given the instability of the jgraphx API, I think it is unlikely that multiple ports could depend on one common version of jgraphx (at least without significant patching), so the benefits of having a jgraphx port are probably limited. Thoughts? --=20 Rob Farmer > > Chris >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTik8O4fpVHU%2B_pFGTRBapTtMx%2B5fJgk4M8QnZsCw>