[CFT] UNIQUENAME patches

[Chris Rees]

On 16 June 2012 15:13, Matthew Seaman <matthew at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 16/06/2012 14:18, Chris Rees wrote:
>> That's great-- though rather than patching colliding-only ports, can't
>> we just add the category to it?
>>
>> .for cat in ${CATEGORIES}
>> UNIQUEPREFIX?= ${cat}
>> .endfor
>>
>> (copying the code from PKGCATEGORY; might be better off moving the
>> PKGCATEGORY code up higher and just using that).
>
> Yes.  I thought long and hard about doing that, but I opted not to for
> two reasons:
>
>   1) Using the port name + a uniqueprefix where necessary produces what
>      is close to the minimal change required to give every port a
>      unique name.  The UNIQUENAME won't actually change for quite a
>      lot of ports under my scheme.
>
>   2) As a way of future-proofing against reorganizations of the ports
>      tree.  What tends to happen is that a new category is invented
>      and a number of ports are moved into it.  My way should avoid
>      changing the UNIQUENAME in the majority of cases.
>
> Remember that changing the UNIQUENAME changes where the record of the
> port options are stored, and either we annoy a lot of users by making
> them fill in a buch of dialogues all over again, or we have to invent
> some complicated mechanism copy the old options settings to the new
> directory.  (Yes -- this sort of thing will occur with the changes as
> written.  It can't be avoided entirely.)
>
> Plus I think it would be more natural and easier for maintainers and
> end-users to talk about (say) "phpmyadmin" rather than
> "databases-phpmyadmin."

Very thoughtful, OK.  You'll also need some sort of cronjob then to
yell at people who duplicate UNIQUENAME then, rather like erwin's
LATEST_LINK script; ports/Tools/scripts/check-latest-link.

Chris