ports structure and improvement suggestions

[Paul Schmehl]

Sideris Michael wrote:
> 
> So, more or less you suggest to leave it in the chaotic situation it is now.
> Sorry but i disagree.
> 
No, I'm suggesting that what you see as chaos isn't.

If there are no KNOBS or OPTIONS required for a port (and there are many 
like that), then why would you want to force all ports to have them?  Do 
you really want to display an empty screen just for "uniformity's" sake?

There are times when OPTIONS is appropriate.  There are times when it is 
definitely not.  There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all port 
structure.  I have ports that compile and ports that simply unzip and 
install.  I have ports that require OPTIONS because the user has to 
decide between two different database types, and I have ports that have 
no OPTIONS or KNOBS at all because there's absolutely nothing to do.

Furthermore, I may want to *force* a use to use a KNOB because I know 
that, if I don't, it won't compile correctly.  Or I may want to use 
OPTIONS because I *don't* want to force the user to use a specific 
version of something.

That isn't chaos.  That's flexibility.

Start maintaining some ports and you will quickly understand what I'm 
saying.

-- 
Paul Schmehl (pauls at utdallas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5007 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20060508/aff970c5/smime.bin