On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Am 02.04.19 um 07:42 schrieb Koichiro Iwao: > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:41:51AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > > > >> Create a real category vpn and move everything to it ? > > > > > > > > Sounds better! Gentoo has net-vpn category. Just FYI, Gentoo also have > > > > net-dialup category. PPP/PPPoE/L2TP softwares are put under net-dialup > > > > but I feel that classification is too fine. At least creating vpn or > > > > net-vpn souds good. > > > > > > How about a new "real" category vpn > > > > > > I am not sure if it should be vpn or net-vpn. I feel net-vpn is > > more suitable. > > > > > > > and preserving the current categories > > > of the ports as their additional categories (assuming that they are in net > > > vs. security for a reason). > > > > > > > I like the idea. > > Creating new categories is absolutely doable! However, we have a > pretty high bar for justifying it. There's no magic number, but our > (portmgr's) precedent is that the new category must, at the time of > creation, be as full as other categories like it. > > The most important thing in the new category proposal is a > comprehensive list of ports that will be moved to it. Put that into a > review or a PR and we can move forward. Fair warning though, if it's > only about a dozen ports, it most likely will not be approved. > > My approach here is that new categories should be virtual unless the > evidence for hard category is incontrovertible.
And in any case, see our documentation: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/committers-guide/ports.html#ports-qa-new-category -- Mathieu Arnold
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
