Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 09:06:51 +0300 From: Vasil Dimov <vd@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: Shaun Amott <shaun@inerd.com>, Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: New category - ports/packages specific tools? Message-ID: <20060516060651.GA52578@qlovarnika.bg.datamax> In-Reply-To: <20060515222815.GA2535@picobyte.net> References: <20060515222815.GA2535@picobyte.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--huq684BweRXVnRxX
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 11:28:16PM +0100, Shaun Amott wrote:
> There are lots of nifty tools in ports for handling ports and packages.
> It would be nice if they were all in one, easy to find place.
>=20
> I think there are enough of these kind of ports to warrant a new
> category. What does everyone think about this?
>=20
> I'm not sure on a name yet -- "freebsd", "ports", "tools", and
> "portutils" are my initial ideas.
>=20
I like the idea for such a category.
IMHO the power of a lot of ports-tree management tools is unused
and lost just because they are unknown to the users. Having such
a category one can easily answer the question "How can I tweak my
ports tree, and use its full potential?" by just looking the ports
inside that category.
What about "ports-mgmt"?
P.S. Pav: from the 61 currently existing categories 26 (43%) have less
than 100 ports and 9 (15%) are smaller than the suggested one.
--=20
Vasil Dimov
gro.DSBeerF@dv
Testing can show the presence of bugs, but not their absence.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra
--huq684BweRXVnRxX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFEaWv7Fw6SP/bBpCARArrUAKDZ/U/2c05Rg/U31NB7DgpcF8rZEACgw+CJ
JGc0zuOWQXUyo2+Es8f6RIc=
=fb1G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--huq684BweRXVnRxX--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060516060651.GA52578>