| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
gravis
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 176
Location: Compiègne, France
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 12:51 pm Post subject: NET-WWW |
 |
|
Hello I find strange to have both servers and clients in net-www tree.
I mean why is jboss, apache, tomcat, zope are in the same dir as mozilla, galeon, etc.
Should we create a new 1st level ? (net-www-client net-www-server maybe) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aja
l33t
Joined: 26 Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Location: Edmonton, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Why is it strange to have servers and clients for the same protocol in the same tree node? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gravis
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 176
Location: Compiègne, France
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 4:46 pm Post subject: www isn't a protocol |
|
|
| ok if you want an exemple : jboss have nothing in common with "www" but jetty (a jsp server). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20067
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That still wouldn't solve the problem. If jboss has nothing in common with "www", I don't think putting it into net-www-server wouldn't make any more sense. Or am I missing something?
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gravis
Apprentice
Joined: 18 Apr 2002
Posts: 176
Location: Compiègne, France
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes you're right |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adamtheo
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 03 Sep 2002
Posts: 123
Location: Tallahassee, Florida USA
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 26, 2002 10:59 pm Post subject: general point |
|
|
I believe his general point is that the net-www category should be re-structured, which I agree we should consider and look into.
_________________
* Theoretic Solutions "The Internet's Open Think-Tank" - http://www.theoretic.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20067
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2002 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Splitting net-www into server/client becomes more semantic then. jboss not belonging in net-www is probably more of an issue (though minor). Is there an existing category that jboss fits into? Other java things seem to be in dev-java. If there's a more apropriate category for it, you might file a bug report at bugs.gentoo.org.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cc
n00b
Joined: 09 Aug 2002
Posts: 27
Location: Taipei, Taiwan
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 27, 2002 4:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
then how about dev-j2ee and dev-j2se and dev-j2me?
but I think this will be too...... @#$@#)%* you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
absinthe
Retired Dev
Joined: 06 Oct 2002
Posts: 111
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:47 am Post subject: Re: NET-WWW |
|
|
| gravis wrote: | Hello I find strange to have both servers and clients in net-www tree.
I mean why is jboss, apache, tomcat, zope are in the same dir as mozilla, galeon, etc.
Should we create a new 1st level ? (net-www-client net-www-server maybe) |
In the absence of another category, net-www makes sense. Tomcat, Orion, JBoss are all network-based web servers, the same as Apache in a general sense, which is also in net-www.
Tomcat, Orion, JBoss, Resin -- all of them serve webpages the same as Apache does (statically). They also run scripting languages (JSP) as well as running PHP and Perl if that's what you want to do. At a fundamental level, these are functionally the same type of application as Apache, and they belong in the same place as Apache.
That is... until a better place exists for web server applications in particular. We have ~90 categories now, which is a LOT. We are trying to avoid category bloat by only making such changes when it truly makes sense to do so.
As a general rule, anything that has over 100 packages should probably be split up. net-www has 88 currently. While I'm not the final arbiter of these changes, my suspicion is that net-www will not get split until it gets closer or passes 100 packages.
I agree on one aspect. "net-www-server" (or something similar) would be more specific, and would probably help users find web server packages a little easier than they might currently. But in the grand scheme of things, we have so many other changes happening with Gentoo that this isn't high in the list of priorities.
If you (and others) feel strongly about this, please file bugs on https://bugs.gentoo.org/. If you want changes like this to be made, that's the best place to make them happen. If we get enough bug reports on it, I guarantee that something will happen.
We are almost totally driven by user input, but things often get lost in the Forums. The real changes happen in Bugzilla, so I again strongly encourage you to file bugs if you want the right people to hear your suggestions/complaints.
Cheers  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
