cvs commit: ports/converters/p5-String-Multibyte Makefile
ports/databases/p5-DBD-Excel Makefile ports/databases/p5-DBD-LDAP
Makefile ports/databases/p5-DBIx-AnyDBD Makefile ...
pav at FreeBSD.org
Wed Sep 21 02:05:37 PDT 2005
Lars Thegler píše v st 21. 09. 2005 v 10:27 +0200:
> Doug Barton wrote:
> >>> In at least one case (the port above) the pkg-descr file was not
> >>> updated to
> >>> reflect this change. Is this something that would be useful to do?
> >> I believe the 'signature' in pkg-descr has the same semantics as the
> >> 'Whom:' line in Makefile, indicating the initial creator of the port.
> >> As least that is how I read porters-handbook.
> > I read "your name" in 3.2.1 as meaning "the name of the person who
> > maintains the port." The creator's name is memorialized in the comment
> > section of the Makefile, I don't see how duplicating that information in
> > pkg-descr would be useful.
> I see you point; however, the exact same reasoning can also be applied
> to the maintainer name in the Makefile.
> So in either case, it seems the 'signature' in pkg-descr is redundant.
> Either it reflects the creator's name, duplicating the comment section,
> or it reflects the maintainer, duplicating the MAINTAINER= line.
> I wonder what the rationale for the 'recommendation' in 3.2.1 was? Anyone?
I believe it just documented the common practice. I'm personally go
with removing the recommendation.
Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
<pav at FreeBSD.org>
A two-eyed cyclops would be a bicyclops.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/attachments/20050921/9c61efa5/attachment.bin
More information about the cvs-ports