Created attachment 143572 [details] port shar see www.playframework.com
There are probably hundreds of PRs trying to add new ports. You probably want to explain what this one is and why it should be added in order to entice somebody to pick it instead of the hundreds that precede it. Adding a compelling description won't guarantee anything, but it sure doesn't hurt. That's a tip from somebody just scanning...
Add a more verbose Summary.
recruit more port commiters then, make it easier for people to join.
Submitting a port doesn't guarantee it gets into the tree. Working / building ports are removed all the time too, so every port is constantly evaluated for worthiness. There could be 100 new committers, but if you submit a port without any kind of introduction of why it is a worthy addition, people aren't going to know what it is and assume that the submitter doesn't care enough to spend 5 minutes explaining what it is (regardless of the considerable amount of time the submitter probably spent developing the port). Anyway, it was a tip. You don't need to take my advice and apparently you didn't like it. Good luck. The PR CC'd me automatically, I'm removing that setting now.
Created attachment 144315 [details] playframework 2.3.1 updated to 2.3.1
Alright, I can't force you to take advice, but I can ask you to provide test logs from poudriere or redports or at least the output from "make check-plist" followed by "make stage-qa" ?
If you choose poudriere, make sure you use either "poudriere testport" or "poudriere bulk -t" in order to enable stage-qa checks, thanks!
port is staged, no bitrot. A testlog would fast-track this into the tree. the "pkg-descr" has a little more information. Not great but better than the summary here.
hsn@sanatana:pts/3):ports/playframework% sudo make check-plist stage-qa ====> Checking for pkg-plist issues (check-plist) ===> Parsing plist ===> Checking for items in STAGEDIR missing from pkg-plist ===> Checking for directories owned by MTREEs ===> Checking for directories handled by dependencies ===> Checking for items in pkg-plist which are not in STAGEDIR ===> No pkg-plist issues found (check-plist) ====> Running Q/A tests (stage-qa) (hsn@sanatana:pts/3):ports/playframework%
Thanks for the test logs. I'll move it patch-ready, but note this is really only "half" tested. Going forward a triager may demand poudriere logs. I'll grandfather this in.
Created attachment 147174 [details] playframework 2.3.4 shar
playframework-2.3.4 Name : playframework Version : 2.3.4 Installed on : Wed Sep 10 15:47:57 CEST 2014 Origin : devel/playframework Architecture : freebsd:10:x86:32 Prefix : /usr/local Categories : java devel Licenses : APACHE20 Maintainer : hsn@sendmail.cz WWW : http://www.playframework.com/ Comment : Rapid development framework for Java and Scala Flat size : 394MiB Description : Play Framework makes it easy to build web applications with Java & Scala. Play is based on a lightweight, stateless, web-friendly architecture. Built on Akka, Play provides predictable and minimal resource consumption (CPU, memory, threads) for highly-scalable applications. WWW: http://www.playframework.com/
I am a bit skeptical about committing this port. Care to explain a few things? Why is it called activator? It seems like bundles a whole lot of other packages within it. Isn't there a way to pack solely the play framework and use the rest as port dependencies? The package file is huge.
its play framework + its dependencies packaged to be used with scala activator manager.
Play framework can be run directly with devel/sbt. I have also a port for activator-minimal, that I'm not sure I'll ever commit (currently it's just a slightly patched sbt). I don't like these bundles that are simply a cache of downloadable dependencies, they don't match the ports system spirit.
I agree, sbt is enough.