Re: Renaming Ant

[Nikolay Sturm <sturm_(_at_)_sec_(_dot_)_informatik_(_dot_)_tu-darmstadt_(_dot_)_de>]

* Ian F. Darwin [2004-01-04]:
> Was this name change discussed? If so I'm sorry I missed it.  I would 

Well, the update was a few weeks old when I took care of it.

> "Jakarta-Ant" or Apache-Ant, there are just books on ANT.  The port 
> name should be just "ant".  We normally name ports by functional 

Might very well be. I have no idea what this ant is and please, noone
expect from me to get to know the software I commit ports for.

> category, not by who wrote them. I know there's a p5- prefix for perl 
> modules, but not every program needs to have a name prefix as well as a 
> category.

Your reasoning makes sense to me and if I were to import all these ports
freshly, knowing what they are about, I'd agree. I didn't take the
chance to fix the error that was made by just getting rid of "jakarta-"
but now, I don't think it's worth renaming ant again just to beautify
the tree. Actually I can live with the current naming scheme insofar as
the distfiles are called apache-* or jakarta-*.

We should certainly keep this in mind when it comes to renaming any of
the other jakarta-* ports. For now I will not rename the port.

If anyone of the senior committers has a different opinion on this,
please let me know.

Nikolay