svn commit: r392209 - in head/devel: . p5-Minilla

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 04:59:21PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 02:52:01PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > I see your point.  I'm not saying that := is *always* a better way; even
> > though I must say debugging Makefiles is pretty easy with -V FOO and @echo
> > in recipes.  What I'm not happy with is blunt ":= is wrong, don't ever use
> > it!" statement: it does come handy often in many cases and checking if it
> > does the right thing is easy once you compare "make -V RUN_DEPENDS | md5"
> > vs. "make -V BULID_DEPENDS | md5" (in addition to visual examination).
> 
> That is imho a too pedantic approach, pragmatism should lead and pragmatism
> is people often misunderstand it, and most people do not understand make(1)
> internals (I won't blame them for that, I would prefer not knowing it in the
> first place). By people I mean both maintainers and committers if you bring
> to the battle the back we do support 2 differents make with slightly
> different behaviours in some part it becomes even more complicated.
> 
> We should promote safe syntaxes by handbook or by our own practive because
> it will be used as example by others. that will save us from hours having
> to clean the ports tree where things can easily break as a side effect of
> changes in other parts of the framework.

Fair enough; even though I still stand by the "people should know their
tools" stanza.  So I'm not openly against that change to the PHB section:
lets make it easier for new folks to get a hold of things, no problem.

But forbidding a 100% perfectly valid, supported, and documented syntax
used in good will and intention by an experienced developer is IMO wrong.

./danfe