From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FyiGj-0001FU-IP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2006 04:48:45 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k674lltK005283; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 04:47:47 GMT Received: from mail.tassoneent.com (tassoneent.com [64.34.163.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k674lkXJ030603 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2006 04:47:46 GMT Received: from [172.21.3.102] (adsl-63-200-91-249.dsl.scrm01.pacbell.net [63.200.91.249]) by mail.tassoneent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C79D9E for ; Thu, 6 Jul 2006 21:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-java] Split of dev-java/ ? From: Greg Tassone To: gentoo-java@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <44AD7DCF.1080909@gentoo.org> References: <44AD7DCF.1080909@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-N8bFpu9dk8f8hj2kcV2F" Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:47:38 -0700 Message-Id: <1152247659.8361.17.camel@greg.tassoneent.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-java@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 X-Archives-Salt: cc1b2cc3-eb4b-47b2-abcf-78e1117d9f19 X-Archives-Hash: a307876667961d10818abbcf9a75806e --=-N8bFpu9dk8f8hj2kcV2F Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 23:17 +0200, Krzysiek Pawlik wrote: ... > dev-java/ has currently 338 packages (and growing ;) ) - maybe it is a > good idea to split it to multiple categories? (basic idea is much like > with perl-core or www-apache categories). I personally like the idea. I don't see any harm in reorganizing into something more manageable, although some might feel it unnecessary from a "user" perspective. I still like it, though... As for your categories, I think they are a great start but I do have some suggestions: > - java-vm/ - all JDKs and JREs (sun, blackdown, kaffe, etc.. jamvm, > sablevm ?) I like it... > - java-commons/ - all commons-* [ other possibility: java-jakarta - to > have all commons-* and jakarta-* packages in it ] > - java-libs/ - all packages providing Java API for other libraries > (like gnome-java, libgconf-java, libgtk-java, etc...) I would probably combine these two into one category called java-libs/ instead of having them separated. However, I don't have a big issue with it either way. > - java-web - WWW related packages (like template engines, web > frameworks) [ or java-www ] I'd probably make this one java-www/ as the "www" is consistent with current package categories in Portage. > - java-db - database access, persistence frameworks, JDBC I like it... > - java-apps - standalone Java applications - like jvmstat, jython, etc) Hmmm, I like this one too. It is consistent with other package categories like "www-apps/" and "sys-apps/". > all the rest could be left in dev-java or moved (preffered?) to > java-util/java-dev/java-misc. I definitely agree that "dev-java/" should be changed. First of all, I like the idea of our categories being consistent with the convention "java-*" as you outline above. This way everything is grouped nicely together in the tree. Furthermore, in keeping with the "catch-all" theme that this final category will most certainly be, I believe that "java-misc/" would be a good choice. Thoughts/comments? ~ Greg --=-N8bFpu9dk8f8hj2kcV2F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEredoaI3pdOrDO40RAt8uAKDeAn0J/v9N37RImuzyEG2RsXUDIQCeMv8D IWnWv8pvenON45HWPFobDfU= =eXc2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-N8bFpu9dk8f8hj2kcV2F-- -- gentoo-java@gentoo.org mailing list