Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 03:45:43PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > And in any case, see our documentation: > > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/committers-guide/ports.html#ports-qa-new-category I've raised bug 239395. I'd appreciate if someone tell me I need to get who's approval to commit this. [1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239395 -- meta ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
Concluding everyone's opinion, starting with virtual category sounds much easier. Thanks. I'll create a list of VPN softwares first. -- meta ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: > I am not sure if it should be vpn or net-vpn. I feel net-vpn is > more suitable. As you know, we already have net-im, net-p2p, net-mgmt categories. This is one of reasons why I feel net-vpn is more suitable. -- meta ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 03:47:30PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 03:34:57PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:29:09AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:24 AM Diane Bruce wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. > > > > > > > > It's far easier making a virtual category and easier to count ports. > > > > e.g. https://www.freshports.org/hamradio > > > > > > > > We have 101 hamradio related ports with more coming... > > > > korean has 43,portuguese has 15,russian has 42 although languages are a > > > > special case palm has 15 ports but whatever. ;) > > > > > > > > I'd be surprised if there weren't more vpn ports than 101 so why not > > > > go with a virtual ports category to start with? > > > > > > Hi Diane, > > > > > > That's a great approach to it! AFAIK we haven't explicitly used > > > virtual categories as a staging ground for hard categories, but that > > > seems like a really pragmatic approach; no matter the outcome, the > > > ports tree comes out ahead. > > > > > > # Adam > > > > Just to say, having a new "real" category will force people to rework their > > entry list for poudriere, reinstall things if they are using portmaster etc. > > For poudriere, it is transparent as it parses MOVED, and new physical > categories add entries in there. I think it will tell you something > about it too. > Same for portmaster yes, I just wanted to raise the fact that virtual categories are transparent addition, but almost useless, while physical one have an impact :) Best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 03:34:57PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:29:09AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:24 AM Diane Bruce wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. > > > > > > It's far easier making a virtual category and easier to count ports. > > > e.g. https://www.freshports.org/hamradio > > > > > > We have 101 hamradio related ports with more coming... > > > korean has 43,portuguese has 15,russian has 42 although languages are a > > > special case palm has 15 ports but whatever. ;) > > > > > > I'd be surprised if there weren't more vpn ports than 101 so why not > > > go with a virtual ports category to start with? > > > > Hi Diane, > > > > That's a great approach to it! AFAIK we haven't explicitly used > > virtual categories as a staging ground for hard categories, but that > > seems like a really pragmatic approach; no matter the outcome, the > > ports tree comes out ahead. > > > > # Adam > > Just to say, having a new "real" category will force people to rework their > entry list for poudriere, reinstall things if they are using portmaster etc. For poudriere, it is transparent as it parses MOVED, and new physical categories add entries in there. I think it will tell you something about it too. -- Mathieu Arnold signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:29:09AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:24 AM Diane Bruce wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. > > > > It's far easier making a virtual category and easier to count ports. > > e.g. https://www.freshports.org/hamradio > > > > We have 101 hamradio related ports with more coming... > > korean has 43,portuguese has 15,russian has 42 although languages are a > > special case palm has 15 ports but whatever. ;) > > > > I'd be surprised if there weren't more vpn ports than 101 so why not > > go with a virtual ports category to start with? > > Hi Diane, > > That's a great approach to it! AFAIK we haven't explicitly used > virtual categories as a staging ground for hard categories, but that > seems like a really pragmatic approach; no matter the outcome, the > ports tree comes out ahead. > > # Adam Just to say, having a new "real" category will force people to rework their entry list for poudriere, reinstall things if they are using portmaster etc. No problem at all for pkg(8) users as it would be transparent As for the virtual category it will work, but has the very limited effect of only allowing things like freshports to list things withing that category, almost nothing else do use the virtual categories. Best regards, Bapt signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 6:24 AM Diane Bruce wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. > > It's far easier making a virtual category and easier to count ports. > e.g. https://www.freshports.org/hamradio > > We have 101 hamradio related ports with more coming... > korean has 43,portuguese has 15,russian has 42 although languages are a > special case palm has 15 ports but whatever. ;) > > I'd be surprised if there weren't more vpn ports than 101 so why not > go with a virtual ports category to start with? Hi Diane, That's a great approach to it! AFAIK we haven't explicitly used virtual categories as a staging ground for hard categories, but that seems like a really pragmatic approach; no matter the outcome, the ports tree comes out ahead. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger ad...@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 06:13:58AM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. It's far easier making a virtual category and easier to count ports. e.g. https://www.freshports.org/hamradio We have 101 hamradio related ports with more coming... korean has 43,portuguese has 15,russian has 42 although languages are a special case palm has 15 ports but whatever. ;) I'd be surprised if there weren't more vpn ports than 101 so why not go with a virtual ports category to start with? > > # Adam > > > -- > Adam Weinberger > ad...@adamw.org > https://www.adamw.org > ___ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" -- - d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://artemis.db.net/~db ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 3:37 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger ad...@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:38:15AM +0200, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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 ? ... ... > > > 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. Hey if you can convince port managers that a new real category is in order I'll petition for a real hamradio category. We are currently split between audio, comms, misc, cad ... ;) It will be much easier getting a new virtual category than a real category. I'd agree a real category for both vpn and hamradio would be nice but it's a PITA and personally I don't feel it matters that much. -- - d...@freebsd.org d...@db.net http://artemis.db.net/~db ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
On Tue, 2 Apr 2019 at 10:58, Stefan Esser 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. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
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 and preserving the current categories of the ports as their additional categories (assuming that they are in net vs. security for a reason). ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
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. -- meta ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: category for VPN softwares?
Hi! > some VPN softwares are in security category/directory. OTOH, some VPN > softwares are in net category/directory. Which is correct & preferred? > Incoherent categories are a little bit surprising and confusing for me. > > I'd like to sort out categories of VPN softwares. Probably we have > following options. What do you think? I'd appreciate any comments or > suggestions. > > 1. Incoherent categories are OK and leave it as-is > 2. Move all VPN softwares to either of net or security > 3. Create a new virtual category "vpn" and leave phys categories as-is > 4. Create a new virtual category "vpn" and also sort out phys categories > 5. Another option Create a real category vpn and move everything to it ? -- p...@opsec.eu+49 171 3101372One year to go ! ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
category for VPN softwares?
Hi, some VPN softwares are in security category/directory. OTOH, some VPN softwares are in net category/directory. Which is correct & preferred? Incoherent categories are a little bit surprising and confusing for me. I'd like to sort out categories of VPN softwares. Probably we have following options. What do you think? I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions. 1. Incoherent categories are OK and leave it as-is 2. Move all VPN softwares to either of net or security 3. Create a new virtual category "vpn" and leave phys categories as-is 4. Create a new virtual category "vpn" and also sort out phys categories 5. Another option -- meta ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
