ports/74696: net/xnap: Remove crosslisting in java category

[Mark Linimon]

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Herve Quiroz wrote:

> This gives that if 'java' is the main and only category of a port, then
> this port is exclusively related to Java, namely JDKs, tools and
> documentations. If 'java' is part of the  additional categories, then
> this port uses Java.

This is my understanding of current practice in the ports tree.

> ports. Currently, IMHO, many ports are located in the java subdirectory
> of the ports tree (often with 'java' as their main and only category)
> when they would better be in a more representative subdirectory.

Well, I'm not terribly enthusiastic about mass repocopies, but in
theory I'd rather see what you suggest - e.g. a java XML processor listed
as 'textproc java', or as a second choice 'java textproc', which would
avoid the need for the repocopy.  But certainly it should not be just
listed as 'java'.

> I was once tempted to request a major set of repocopies to reflect this,
> but then I realized that only JDKs would stay in the 'java'
> subdirectory. But then, shouldn't JDKs reside in 'lang', as it is the
> case for any other language compilers and runtimes?

Philosophically: possibly yes.  But I don't feel strongly enough about
the matter to advocate for the ~135 repocopies all this would require :-)
(nb: 68 of the 135 ports in java/ are already listed in multiple
categories).

mcl