Cleaning up pkg-message

[David Wolfskill]

On Sat, Jun 08, 2019 at 12:11:57PM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> I want to get some stakeholder input on our pkg-message files. I think
> we need to have a clear policy about what does and doesn't belong in
> them, and I'd like to get your input.
> 
> pkg-message is shown to every user on every install. UPDATING is only
> shown when users run `pkg updating` *and* /usr/ports/UPDATING exists.
> I suspect that only a small proportion of users do that.

Well, for folks who install pre-built packages, probably.

For those of us who -- for at least some systems -- build from ports
locally, I'm less confident: I check it for relevant entries that
have been added since last time I updated installed ports on my
laptop or local build machine (which is daily) or my work desktop
(which is weekly).

Mind, its utility falls a bit short of the mark: ref.
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227193

> pkg-message needs to contain only highly relevant information. Many,
> many ports have messages with irrelevant information that users are
> likely to get message fatigue and ignore them entirely. I don't want
> to pick on Joe Barbish, because his work is absolutely fantastic, but
> dns/dns2blackhole/pkg-message is an example of a giant message that
> tells users to do the same thing they always do for any port:
> ########################################################################
> 
>                       dns2blackhole
> 
>    Malware Prevention through Domain Blocking (Black Hole)
> 
>    Issue "man dns2blackhole"  For configuration and usage information
> 
> ########################################################################
> 
> We now have the ability to specify messages that appear on initial
> install, or on upgrades from/to specific version. So here is what I
> propose as policy:
> 
> >>>
> pkg-message must contain only information that is vital to setup and
> operation, and that is unique to the port in question. Setup
> information should only be shown on initial install, and upgrade
> instructions should be shown only when upgrading to the relevant
> version. All committers have blanket approval to constrain existing
> messages to install/upgrade ranges using the UCL format
> specifications. Message pruning falls under the blanket approval as
> well, but committers are encouraged to get maintainer input
> beforehand.
> <<<
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> ....

No objections, and de-cluttering seems like a pretty good idea.  (At
least you didn't insert a requirement that any such messages must "spark
joy." :-) )

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
"...including Mars (of which the Moon is a part)...." -- Donald J. Trump

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 618 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20190608/5ba8326a/attachment.sig>