Three-level ports (Re: RFC: patch for bsd.port.mk to use ${PORTSDIR}/MOVED)

[Clement Laforet]

On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:10:23 -0700
Kris Kennaway <kris at obsecurity.org> wrote:

> [*] e.g. addressing some key technical issues like the fact that all
> the repo-copies needed to move ports around would more than double the
> size of the ports CVS repository, add 9000 lines to MOVED, etc.  The
> broad outline of the transition I am imagining is to make a misc/
> subdirectory for each category (e.g. net/misc/) that would hold all
> the ports that are not moved to other subdirectories
> (e.g. net/clients/ or whatever), to avoid the problem of mixing ports
> and subdirectories at the second level in the ports tree.  We'd try to
> come up with an initial list of how to split up each category and
> divide up as many of the ports as we can, and leave the unclassified
> remainder in ${CATEGORY}/misc/.  There's not a whole lot of point
> jumping in to the details until we have the infrastructure, and
> committer management ready though.
> 
> Kris
> 

So, the short answer is: "not for moment" :)
currently ports tree has ~ 9050 ports, ~ 1130 maintainers, and ~ 1960
different dependencies. 
It should be a good start to define, at least, futures categories and
their subdir, so maintainers, committers and people who give a piece of
interrest in ports, can define the future place for each port, waiting
for someone who'll write patches and scripts that will be reviewed by
portmgr team.
most of the work can be done automatically, with a good strategy.

regards,

clem