On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 10:07, Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Of course, the problem of duplicates needs some rules. IMO packagers should discuss how to merge their ports (of they're not equal) and discuss their differences to get a common solution. I'm not quite sure though what to do if they fail to find a consensus: ..... In the end I think it's not a bad approach to have duplicates and discuss them in a dedicated mailing list, as you can learn a lot from other packagers.
I agree. I dont think duplicate ports are a problem, as long as they use different configure-options (for example --enable_kde) or a binay- and a source-version AND the used options should be documented in a README-file. So everybody can decide for his own which port he uses.
Of course, the httpup approach has some problem as well; packager can disappear, but they're httpup repos are still online. In such cases, we'd need to stop updating from his repo to allow others to maintain his ports... we could require all maintainer to visit an URL with id every month to make sure they're alive.
That's why in my opinion the best solution is to have one point, where everything is avalible: -the information of the port -and the port its self (maybe as gzip file). so you dont have to download a complete repository only for using one port. btw: any comments or improvment suggestions for my database? http://cruxports.tbmnet.de/ (here is a xhtml-preview: http://www.tbmnet.de/tbmnet.php?content=crux_ports_database not yet xhtml strict valid) regards till