ports/ languages categories

[Doug Barton]

On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, David DEMELIER wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I personally think that categories like french, japanese, arabic,
> etc... are not the best way to write a language dependant port. Now,
> there is no many languages categories in the ports tree but we can
> plan that in the future more directories for the new future languages
> dependant port can be added. Example : if someone write a new aspell
> language that is not in the ports tree, we must create a new directory
> in the ports tree ports/.
>
> For example: there is no ports/italian directory now, will you create
> a new italian directory if we must add aspell for italian? (no it's in
> textproc/it-aspell and it's confusing)

For all of the literal categories (I.e., those that live in real 
directories) the path has always been that new things are introduced in 
whatever existing category is the most appropriate. Then at some point 
someone notices, "Hey, there are sure a lot of foo, maybe we should 
create ports/foo to put them all in." That suggestion goes to the -ports 
list, it gets discussed, if there is enough support for it then 
ports/foo is born and things are moved into it.

Nothing about that procedure is different as it relates to the 
language-specific categories.


hth,

Doug

-- 

 	Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
 	a domain name makeover!    http://SupersetSolutions.com/

 	Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
 			-- Pablo Picasso