On Jun 11, 2009, at 1:50 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I find it simpler to set things up like the above example instead (this avoids an extra variant and avoids having to indicate conflicting variants).To me, it's the difference between whether the option, if it were presented to the user in a GUI, were presented as a checkbox or as a set of radio buttons.
Since they produce the same output, and MacPorts doesn't present checkboxes or radio buttons to the user, I don't think that that's really a valid distinction.
The difference is that one method results in 2 variants that conflict plus the 'magic' of default variants. Once you mix in the registry not storing negative variants, I think you end up with ugly user interaction if the user wants the non default one (especially when he/ she goes to upgrade it - unless that has been fixed?)
Having required features in a default variant also breaks the conceptual model of the no variant version of the port being the normal/recommended/featureful version with variants being special cases.
-- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- [email protected] ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
