Mail archive
alpine-devel

Re: [alpine-devel] Alpine ports layout

From: Cág <ca6c_at_bitmessage.ch>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 21:27:57 +0100

A. Wilcox wrote:

> Long version: Speaking from experience having been involved with
> multiple systems (Gentoo, FreeBSD, and NetBSD, to name a few), package
> categories were always a pain point. Some great examples:
> Does OpenSSH belong in security/, net/, admin/, or something else?

security. net/ is for dhcpcd/openvpn/vnc kind of stuff. admin/ doesn't
even exist in Net/OpenBSDs.

> Are we going to put every desktop/graphical package under "x11/"? Or
> is that just for X.Org and base libraries? Do we add "gnome/",
> "kde/", "lxqt/", and so on as categories? Where do packages like
> Pidgin go, which are strictly Gtk+ but have integration with both
> Gnome and KDE?

x11/ is for window managers, icon themes, panels, common files for
desktop environments. So, for gnome-panel applets that monitor traffic
there's net/. Xfce's Thunar is in sys/. For Pidgin there's chat/.

> Is "www/" for clients like Firefox? Servers like Apache? Both?
> Would a user really want to scroll through a bunch of nginx modules to
> see what browsers are available?

For both. Now there's no way anyway to see what browsers are available:
Firefox is in testing, -esr is in community; Chromium is in community
and netsurf is in testing while lynx is in main. apk, as far as I know,
doesn't search by descriptions.

Anyway, if there would be a heated discussion on where a port whould be
placed, we can look at BSDs and simply copy. Take a quick glance at
pkgsrc.se, I think the way the ports are organised is sane.

> Also, packages are categorised the way they are to show the level of
> support they have. "main" is reserved for packages that have
> upstreams committed to maintaining stability, as Timo stated.
> "community" is for packages that may not be so stable. This way you
> know exactly what you are getting yourself in to (and can even disable
> community repo if you really need stability guarantee).

That's what I'm talking about - it's vague. It should be either stable
or not stable, so it would land in wip/. And wip/ is a different repo.
On NetBSD wip packages are only in the tree and not in repos (because most
of them can't be compiled, but that's another story).


-- 
caóc
---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help_at_lists.alpinelinux.org
---
Received on Fri Sep 01 2017 - 21:27:57 GMT