On Aug 21, 2012, at 4:26 PM, Jeremy Lavergne <[email protected]> wrote: > Here are our thoughts on the variants, mostly about user assumptions: > * making subports for every combination of variants is messy (e.g. > python{24,25,26,27}-ucs{2,4}-svn)
It is. It would be really nice if we could narrow down the number of supported pythons/perls/etc. so that there was less of this. > * defaulting to a non-default variant may surprise users by suddenly building > packages (e.g. buildbots would never build it/isn't a tested combination > across platforms) > * -devel use is still inconsistent: something else may have non-optional > dependency on it (e.g. the user doesn't actually want glib2-devel but doesn't > know it's about to get picked) > * some packages require a choice in variants and don't make any assumptions > (e.g. which database to use) I believe that this is a policy violation (and so a bug with any port that does that). You should get a 'sane' install of some sort whenever you run 'port install foo' > * users fear/ignore helpful exit messages, assuming they are errors > * some people have their upgrades scripted out and will be cranky that an > assumption wasn't followed by a "smart" portfile Having the portfiles be as stupid as possible (and as declarative as possible) is good. -- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- [email protected] ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+ _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
