Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On 11/16/2013 2:08 PM, Eitan Adler wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: On 11/16/2013 8:25 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: That's parseable using the regex or literal matching built into every scripting language, most programming languages, and your average human. Sure, but it requires extra tooling to make it work. I don't care which file the data are stored in, I just (a) don't want it to be free form (b) want it to be in some standard format. If you want to carry on about using an existing format, the above is CSV (character-separated values)--one of the most well-established and well-supported file formats in existence. Eh, the format proposed does not even come close to RFC 4180 (CSV). Heh. Pre-coffee brain failure. :) It is, however, the same format used for headers is pretty much everything. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > On 11/16/2013 8:25 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: > That's parseable using the regex or literal matching built into every > scripting language, most programming languages, and your average human. Sure, but it requires extra tooling to make it work. I don't care which file the data are stored in, I just (a) don't want it to be free form (b) want it to be in some standard format. > If > you want to carry on about using an existing format, the above is CSV > (character-separated values)--one of the most well-established and > well-supported file formats in existence. Eh, the format proposed does not even come close to RFC 4180 (CSV). -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On 11/16/2013 8:25 AM, Eitan Adler wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: 2) If meta-information is moved to pkg-descr, it might be worthwhile to add some knowledge about formats and restrictions to portlint. If we go this route I would *strongly* prefer that we do not invent our own format. We should use an existing format. (I don't care which one: YAML, JSON, ...) ? Which both require parsing libraries. We don't need that and neither does anything else that might want to read the ports tree and extract this information. This is easily implemented with simple keywords: We have "WWW:" in pkg-descr. So add "License:", "Vendor:", etc. to pkg-descr. That's parseable using the regex or literal matching built into every scripting language, most programming languages, and your average human. If you want to carry on about using an existing format, the above is CSV (character-separated values)--one of the most well-established and well-supported file formats in existence. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: >> 2) If meta-information is moved to pkg-descr, it might be worthwhile >> to add some knowledge about formats and restrictions to portlint. If we go this route I would *strongly* prefer that we do not invent our own format. We should use an existing format. (I don't care which one: YAML, JSON, ...) ? -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Fri, 15 Nov 2013, Stefan Esser wrote: Am 15.11.2013 08:23, schrieb Matthew Seaman: On 15/11/2013 00:54, Eitan Adler wrote: On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote: On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:30, Erwin Lansing wrote: That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to where these end up. Apart from spreading this information into to many places (pkg_desc seams a proper place to have such information), why have the Makefile double up as a database? pkg_descr is free form. Makefiles are parsable (make -V). pkg_descr is only as free-form as we define it to be. It's a lot quicker to parse out the WWW entry from pkg_descr than it is to run 'make -V' to extract values from port Makefiles. That's because make includes and parses a whole stack of different files from /usr/ports/Mk and elsewhere and does a bunch of other processing -- takes about 200ms per port just to print out the variables used in the INDEX. +1. I also fail to see the upside of adding extra variables to the makefiles. Requestor of this feature already hinted it's going to be queried using the pkg command, so all it needs is a pkg command that can parse a single line into 2 meaningful chunks, using well-defined delimiters. In addition, there's no descision being made based upon these variables in the building/installation process. So, unless the variable is needed as part of the build process for a port putting it in pkg_decr makes sense to me. This could include some well-known values like MAINTAINER if we want to go that far. Two comments: 1) I think that pkg-descr contains information about the ported software, not the port. I.e. the web-site, the organisation, or the license are good candidates for pkg-descr. The maintainer or other information that does not relate to the ported software itself but just to how it is managed in the FreeBSD ports tree should be kept in some other place. (IMHO) License is used in port building logic. Adding more metadata to pkg-descr fills up the 4k holes mentioned earlier in the thread and adds possibilities for sites like freshports to add more content with minimal effort. Since metadata and description are words with similar meaning, I don't see a need for a name change or new file, as proposed earlier. 2) If meta-information is moved to pkg-descr, it might be worthwhile to add some knowledge about formats and restrictions to portlint. +1 -- Melvyn Sopacua ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
Am 15.11.2013 08:23, schrieb Matthew Seaman: > On 15/11/2013 00:54, Eitan Adler wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Jaap Akkerhuis >> wrote: >>> >>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:30, Erwin Lansing >>> wrote: >>> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to where these end up. >>> >>> Apart from spreading this information into to many places >>> (pkg_desc seams a proper place to have such information), why >>> have the Makefile double up as a database? >> >> pkg_descr is free form. Makefiles are parsable (make -V). > > pkg_descr is only as free-form as we define it to be. It's a lot > quicker to parse out the WWW entry from pkg_descr than it is to > run 'make -V' to extract values from port Makefiles. That's > because make includes and parses a whole stack of different files > from /usr/ports/Mk and elsewhere and does a bunch of other > processing -- takes about 200ms per port just to print out the > variables used in the INDEX. > > So, unless the variable is needed as part of the build process for > a port putting it in pkg_decr makes sense to me. This could > include some well-known values like MAINTAINER if we want to go > that far. Two comments: 1) I think that pkg-descr contains information about the ported software, not the port. I.e. the web-site, the organisation, or the license are good candidates for pkg-descr. The maintainer or other information that does not relate to the ported software itself but just to how it is managed in the FreeBSD ports tree should be kept in some other place. (IMHO) 2) If meta-information is moved to pkg-descr, it might be worthwhile to add some knowledge about formats and restrictions to portlint. Regards, STefan ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On 15/11/2013 00:54, Eitan Adler wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote: >> >> On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:30, Erwin Lansing wrote: >> >>> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about >>> spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split >>> content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the >>> current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like >>> COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to >>> where these end up. >> >> Apart from spreading this information into to many places (pkg_desc seams >> a proper place to have such information), why have the Makefile double up >> as a database? > > pkg_descr is free form. Makefiles are parsable (make -V). pkg_descr is only as free-form as we define it to be. It's a lot quicker to parse out the WWW entry from pkg_descr than it is to run 'make -V' to extract values from port Makefiles. That's because make includes and parses a whole stack of different files from /usr/ports/Mk and elsewhere and does a bunch of other processing -- takes about 200ms per port just to print out the variables used in the INDEX. So, unless the variable is needed as part of the build process for a port putting it in pkg_decr makes sense to me. This could include some well-known values like MAINTAINER if we want to go that far. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote: > > On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:30, Erwin Lansing wrote: > >> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about >> spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split >> content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the >> current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like >> COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to >> where these end up. > > Apart from spreading this information into to many places (pkg_desc seams > a proper place to have such information), why have the Makefile double up > as a database? pkg_descr is free form. Makefiles are parsable (make -V). -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:30, Erwin Lansing wrote: > That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about > spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split > content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the > current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like > COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to > where these end up. Apart from spreading this information into to many places (pkg_desc seams a proper place to have such information), why have the Makefile double up as a database? jaap signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:11:11PM -0500, Kris Moore wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 11/14/2013 03:39, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 08:30:08AM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > >>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua > wrote: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > > > > Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > > our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > > information out for display graphically, like descriptions, > maintainers, > > website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to > pull the > > actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the > vendor > > would be "Mozilla". > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? > >>> > >>> This adds a lot of work to the parser. > >>> > >>> IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's > >>> Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since > >>> we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. > >>> > >> > >> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about > >> spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split > >> content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the > >> current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like > >> COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to > >> where these end up. > >> > >> Erwin > >> > > That is easy to fix: > > VENDOR= MOZILLA > > MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME= mozilla > > MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW= http://www.mozilla.org/ > > > > and a bsd.vendor.mk the same way we have bsd.options.mk > > > > if MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME and MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW are already in > bsd.vendor.mk the > > port just have to specify VENDOR: MOZILLA > > > > Don't know if it is worth capitalizing :) > > > > regards, > > Bapt > > This seems a great way to do it. I'm not picky as to how its done, just > as long as in PKGNG I can use pkg query '%foo' and pull the information ;) > What can be done is to automatically add it into annotations, so querying annotation should give you the right information :) regards, Bapt pgpAztdsi1Mlb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 11/14/2013 03:39, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 08:30:08AM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, > website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the > actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor > would be "Mozilla". WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? >>> >>> This adds a lot of work to the parser. >>> >>> IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's >>> Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since >>> we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. >>> >> >> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about >> spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split >> content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the >> current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like >> COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to >> where these end up. >> >> Erwin >> > That is easy to fix: > VENDOR= MOZILLA > MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME= mozilla > MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW= http://www.mozilla.org/ > > and a bsd.vendor.mk the same way we have bsd.options.mk > > if MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME and MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW are already in bsd.vendor.mk the > port just have to specify VENDOR: MOZILLA > > Don't know if it is worth capitalizing :) > > regards, > Bapt This seems a great way to do it. I'm not picky as to how its done, just as long as in PKGNG I can use pkg query '%foo' and pull the information ;) - -- Kris Moore PC-BSD Software iXsystems -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJShQQvAAoJEH/cIgwwV3zXYmUIAJsSvj9llOtyYgC/ri6pzCtn DkWniQB4zZzjShyq6DIFXAb2DiCwFicjm368U76PbiixH2JLGlLrG7lxBuZsZAqt W4vt+RifcEUSVsCCXP/Z8qItVL0cW2wEiWujqDhcWJSdZ7iPgcNyhEERkBpe67Dl e4C8OpznljVE1lplDdWUCD8y8UUPTnpHOSPkx/t1KJxZIsIKFzkuPT1hArYZ4Cpn wokJU2z+8uB9jmYq2QlOe4sFn9P07ZxBNGI1tCuTH1q9PNhj2xPK7y9GmGchv4GP sh++Z/CxeDFKXKP/ex+wiogx0r7Mn3kqlb2A6zWSSO8tBHszVvAumJMPRXh8QHY= =H8hI -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
Dnia 14 lis 2013 o godz. 15:33 Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> napisał(a): > Jason Helfman wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Erwin Lansing wrote: > > [...] > >>> That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about >>> spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split >>> content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the >>> current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like >>> COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to >>> where these end up. >>> >>> Erwin >>> >> >> With good ideas usually bloat is not too far behind. I think this is a >> great idea, however I think it would be >> worth considering a potential new file for this, that can be parsed without >> causing too much new data in existing >> files. Perhaps, a file named pkg-vendor. In this file, all sorts of >> information can be places, and parsed or used >> by our package infrastructure. >> >> -jgh > > I don't think the new file is a good idea. It means more than 20 000 more > files in /usr/ports, so all fs related operations will be slower (svn > checkout, portsnap updated and extract or even ports.tar.gz extract) > And more space will be wasted just for a few new short lines of text (about > 4kB for each file of size in tens of bytes) > > Miroslav Lachman A new file in /usr/ports with mappings port -> meta information, rather than one file per port. That was my initial understanding. There are drawbacks of that (synchronization between tree and file) but it seems to be better than one file per port. Best regards Łukasz Siemiradzki ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
Jason Helfman wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Erwin Lansing wrote: [...] That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to where these end up. Erwin With good ideas usually bloat is not too far behind. I think this is a great idea, however I think it would be worth considering a potential new file for this, that can be parsed without causing too much new data in existing files. Perhaps, a file named pkg-vendor. In this file, all sorts of information can be places, and parsed or used by our package infrastructure. -jgh I don't think the new file is a good idea. It means more than 20 000 more files in /usr/ports, so all fs related operations will be slower (svn checkout, portsnap updated and extract or even ports.tar.gz extract) And more space will be wasted just for a few new short lines of text (about 4kB for each file of size in tens of bytes) Miroslav Lachman ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
Jason Helfman : On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Erwin Lansing wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > > >> > >> Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > >> our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > >> information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, > >> website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the > >> actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor > >> would be "Mozilla". > > > > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? > > This adds a lot of work to the parser. > > IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's > Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since > we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. > That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to where these end up. Erwin With good ideas usually bloat is not too far behind. I think this is a great idea, however I think it would be worth considering a potential new file for this, that can be parsed without causing too much new data in existing files. Perhaps, a file named pkg-vendor. In this file, all sorts of information can be places, and parsed or used by our package infrastructure. I like that idea, but how about carrying it on a bit to enable more metadata, such as Trove categorization, generic descriptions, links to relevant sites of interest for the port, etc.pp. Instead of pkg-vendor, I'd name it pkg-meta or so and something like the following comes into mind: VENDOR: ' NAME : Vendor WWW : UrlOfVendor ' UPSTREAM: ' CONTACT : UpstreamDeveloperContact BUGS : LinkToUpstreamBugTrackerOrWhatever CHANGELOG: LinkToUpstreamChangeLog ' CLASSIFICATION: ' trove classifiers here ' LINKS: ' DOC : LinkToOnlineReference DOC : OtherLinkToOnlineReference RELATED : LinkToRelatedProjectOfRelevance COMMERCIAL : LinkToCommercialSite/Support/whatever YOURIDEAHERE : .. ' Personally, I would not want to see that being parsed by some make-compatible implementation, but would rather see some supplementary script in Tools/ or something else to deal with this. Especially to avoid keeping the format limited to cope with the limitation of make and sh. Since the meta information are not necessary by the ports infrastructure (as pointed out earlier), supplementary third-party tools and projects can and should deal with it. Cheers Marcus ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 08:30:08AM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > > >> our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > > >> information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, > > >> website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the > > >> actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor > > >> would be "Mozilla". > > > > > > > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > > > > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? > > > > This adds a lot of work to the parser. > > > > IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's > > Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since > > we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. > > > > That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about > spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split > content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the > current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like > COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to > where these end up. > > Erwin > That is easy to fix: VENDOR= MOZILLA MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME= mozilla MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW= http://www.mozilla.org/ and a bsd.vendor.mk the same way we have bsd.options.mk if MOZILLA_VENDOR_NAME and MOZILLA_VENDOR_WWW are already in bsd.vendor.mk the port just have to specify VENDOR: MOZILLA Don't know if it is worth capitalizing :) regards, Bapt pgpTzJcu4IHsj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua > wrote: > > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > > >> our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > > >> information out for display graphically, like descriptions, > maintainers, > > >> website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull > the > > >> actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the > vendor > > >> would be "Mozilla". > > > > > > > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > > > > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? > > > > This adds a lot of work to the parser. > > > > IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's > > Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since > > we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. > > > > That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about > spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split > content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the > current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like > COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to > where these end up. > > Erwin > With good ideas usually bloat is not too far behind. I think this is a great idea, however I think it would be worth considering a potential new file for this, that can be parsed without causing too much new data in existing files. Perhaps, a file named pkg-vendor. In this file, all sorts of information can be places, and parsed or used by our package infrastructure. -jgh -- Jason Helfman | FreeBSD Committer j...@freebsd.org | http://people.freebsd.org/~jgh | The Power to Serve ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 04:47:20PM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > > > >> > >> Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build > >> our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the > >> information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, > >> website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the > >> actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor > >> would be "Mozilla". > > > > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? > > This adds a lot of work to the parser. > > IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's > Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since > we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. > That sounds like an excellent idea. I'm just a bit worried about spreading the information over too many places, and would rather split content from logic and add these to pkg-descr as well next to the current WWW. I know we're not consistent already with things like COMMENT and LICENSE already in the Makefile, so won't ojbect too much to where these end up. Erwin -- Erwin Lansinghttp://droso.dk er...@freebsd.orghttp:// www.FreeBSD.org ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: > On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: > >> >> Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build >> our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the >> information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, >> website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the >> actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor >> would be "Mozilla". > > > WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) > > So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? This adds a lot of work to the parser. IMHO we should have VENDOR_WWW and possibly VENDOR_NAME in the port's Makefile. It should not be hard to automate this for VENDOR_WWW since we already have the WWW: lines in pkg-descr. However I wonder how much non-porting metadata we should special case. In particular see below: >While I'm on the topic, how about a broader "type" for ports as well? >Something like "gui/cli/library/data/doc/meta/foo" would be helpful to >further categorize applications. This has come up before. There are two options a) FreeBSD itself could come up with some level of categorization. In this case we should validate the data. b) We can supply the ability for ports to include metadata useful for third parties. In this case we should not validate the data. In the past I've argued for option B as the amount of data we could add is endless. Since the primary consumer would be PC-BSD or other package management tools which would you prefer? -- Eitan Adler ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
On Wed, 13 Nov 2013, Kris Moore wrote: Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor would be "Mozilla". WWW: [Mozilla](http://www.mozilla.org/) So, markdown format in pkg-descr. Seems the least amount of work? ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Proposal for Authors / Vendors in ports
Wanted to run this by the ports community, see your thoughts. We build our PBIs from the ports system, and are able to parse most of the information out for display graphically, like descriptions, maintainers, website, License, etc. However we currently don't have a way to pull the actual name of the upstream vendor / author. I.E. for Firefox the vendor would be "Mozilla". This information is useful to use, because we want to be able to show users who exactly is the author of the software, not just the maintainer, which may only be gnome@ or ports@ or whatever. Does anybody have any thoughts on if this could be something we support in the tree? While I'm on the topic, how about a broader "type" for ports as well? Something like "gui/cli/library/data/doc/meta/foo" would be helpful to further categorize applications. -- Kris Moore PC-BSD Software iXsystems ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
