port renaming

[Vsevolod Stakhov]

On 16/07/2015 18:11, Henry Hu wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Vsevolod Stakhov
> <vsevolod at highsecure.ru <mailto:vsevolod at highsecure.ru>> wrote:
> 
>     On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Anton Yuzhaninov <citrin at citrin.ru
>     <mailto:citrin at citrin.ru>> wrote:
>     >
>     > Port maintainers and port commiters, when PORTNAME/PKGNAMEPREFIX/PKGNAMESUFFIX is changed, please note this change in commit log and for important ports also in /usr/ports/UPDATING. Any rename affect at leas some of FreeBSD users and
>     >
>     > Depends in our local ports was broken and I spent some time to figure out why.
>     > It turns out, that PORTNAME for graphics/gd was changed in r324437.
>     > No singe word about this rename was added to commit message or UPDATING...
> 
>     From the perspective of pkg things are even worse, as pkg can no
>     longer detect that the renamed package is a replacement for some
>     existing one. It breaks many stuff and solver could hardly help to
>     resolve this in a pain-less matter. We need something like 'Replace'
>     or 'Obsolete' field badly. 'UPDATING' does NOT help to solve this task
>     at all.
> 
> 
> We already have the 'MOVED' file. Does it help?

It doesn't because:

1) it is human readable and not very convenient for parsing;
2) we must keep this information on per-package basis and not globally;
3) many items are missing in MOVED (and I've recently missed one when
changing a port, for example)
4) MOVED contains too many unnecessary information that is useful merely
because we are using archaic version control system (namely, subversion)

So the answer is no: we need a special field in manifests to make
renaming transparent for pkg and, in turn, for users.

-- 
Vsevolod Stakhov