Has the port collection become to large to handle.

[Jim Stapleton]

maybe this is a bit off target, but it seems to me the ports tree is
not too large:

I've found stuff I've wanted that wasn't on the ports tree.

I think it's too small. Unless you are on a 56k, but then everything
ports related will be painful.

However a reoganization could be in order... Currently we have:
portbase/category/port/

Each category could have hundreds of ports that are related in the
category, but clutter a search, especially in categories with over 100
ports...

My suggestion, why not add another level:
portbase/category/subcategory/port/

As well as some "virtual" categories, such as all "perl", "python",
"php", and "c_c++" will be put under lang as sub-categories, with
_all_ modules for these languages, and then if you are thinking "mysql
access for python" while doing your ports search, you'll go to the
databases/mysql/ subcategory, and see a symlink to the python module
to access mysql.

And then there would be a dependancy translation table: it if a
dependancy isn't found, it'll look on the table, which will convert
from the current structure to the new structure within the port make
system, and hopefully prevent most/all change issues.


Sorry if this suggestion is too farr off the topic (or already been
posted, I got about half way through, and found I need to get to
work...)

Thanks,
-Jim