On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev <da...@freebsd.org>wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:56:07AM -0500, Mark Felder wrote: > > So we just got done porting most of the tree to a new options syntax > > and now we want to change it again? :-) > > Yeah, why not? ;-) > > I've discussed that idea before with bapt@ on IRC; there is absolutely > no reasons why we should not use now-free nice, short OPTIONS knob again. > > Obviously, it will happen gradually, in a piece-meal fashion; just like > with recently introduced FOO_*_DEPENDS stuff. No one is talking about > converting all ports at once. > > I personally really don't like to have two, often duplicating, lists of > OPTIONS_DEFINE and _DEFAULT, esp. given the fact that OPTIONS_DEFAULT > tends to break indentation. > > ./danfe > > Perhaps your proposal would carry more weight, feedback and/or testing results if it included a patch and an example port with the modified values for your new idea. This has been quiet successful in the recent past with bapt's proposals for options, uses, etc. -jgh -- Jason Helfman | FreeBSD Committer j...@freebsd.org | http://people.freebsd.org/~jgh | The Power to Serve _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"