www/joomla3 port installs from GitHub, why?

[Dan Mahoney (Gushi)]

On Mon, 21 May 2018, Peter Pentchev wrote:

> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 04:49:34PM -0700, Dan Mahoney (Gushi) wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 May 2018, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/20/18 21:15, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
>>>> 21.05.2018 2:02, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>
>>> OK, I'll try to explain a bit more.
>>>
>>> Firstly, this port is PHP code and needs no compilation, so they are
>>> both source files. NO_BUILD=       yes
>>>
>>> www/wordpress is a similar port, correctly implemented in the ports
>>> tree, if you install it from ports you will have identical result to
>>> downloading from wordpress.org and extract it manually.
>>>
>>> The difference as stated above, is that the FreeBSD port includes the
>>> files for *development* of Joomla, the official download has all the
>>> files necessay to build a website based on Joomla.
>>>
>>> It may be that there are people using FreeBSD to develop Joomla, then of
>>> course this port are for them, although a more proper naming would be
>>> joomla3-devel or somesuch.
>>
>> joomla-devel would kind of imply that you're installing the "devel" version
>> of it, not that it includes the devel LIBS.  This seems to be a standard
>> wording for ports (see locate /usr/ports/ | grep \\\-devel | grep pkg-descr
>> | xargs cat )
>>
>> What makes more sense to me is that the Dev files would be part of a
>> non-default option -- whether that's included with the normal .tar.gz or
>> requires the github copy, I can't say.
>>
>> I don't know if there's a *canonical* naming that universally means this is
>> what '-devel' means.
>
> Errr, ICBW (one needs to look at the history of the port), but in
> FreeBSD a -devel version of the port is usually created when somebody
> wants to be able to install a version that is currently under
> development and yet keep the ability for normal users to use the stable
> version.  In these cases, a second port is created (once upon a time
> this was done by a repository copy to preserve the port's history) that
> is exactly the same as the first one, and then the port maintainer
> updates the second port (the -devel one) to a newer version.

I feel like we're in agreement here.  You install -devel if you want the 
"experimental" or "beta" version of a port.  It's not necessarily an 
install of a "Dev kit".  (Compare this with debian, where the -dev suffix 
on a package includes the .h files required to build a thing from 
scratch).

My questions were meta to the discussion about how to fix Joomla:

My question was "is this by tradition or is there a formal point here 
(say, in the porter's handbook) that this is the only thing -devel should 
be used for?"

If not, are there exceptions, a case where -devel means something 
different?  And if that's the case, should a different name be chosen?

Are there any suffixes like this, which aren't necessarily flavorable, 
since the -devel version of a port may be significantly different from the 
release version.  So, not like -nox11, or is -devel unique this way?

Also, should -devel by default include -debug -- after all, if you're 
installing the beta of a software, it might be assumed you have interest 
in reporting issues?

-Dan

-- 


--------Dan Mahoney--------
Techie,  Sysadmin,  WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC
FB:  fb.com/DanielMahoneyIV
LI:   linkedin.com/in/gushi
Site:  http://www.gushi.org
---------------------------