> On Oct 22, 2016, at 8:08 PM, Marko Käning <mk-macpo...@posteo.net> wrote: > > in the light of the upcoming commit of the new 'qt5-kde' port I want > to ask (again) whether it would be acceptable, that we - for the sake > of housekeeping - store all KF5-related ports in a dedicated folder at > > dports/kf5 > > or whether it is really necessary, that all these KDE ports have to > live under > > dports/kde > > just like all those port files belonging to KDE 3 and 4?
Why should KF5 get its own category? It's not special. > - and both port collections having independent maintainers (Nicolas > and René) This has no bearing on anything. > it would make maintenance easier if one kept also their storage > locations separate, no? I don't see why separating them would make anything easier. It's not as if there's any namespacing going on. The ports would still have to have unique names. > Are there other reasons of not going for such an approach which we up > to now aren’t aware of, perhaps? I think having top-level directories based on implementation details like language or framework are silly and pointless from a users' perspective, and we should not add anymore of them. (No, I don't like the top-level "java", "php", "python", etc. directories, either.) vq _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
