On 01.10.2014 09:39 pm, Sean Farley wrote:
> Lawrence Velázquez writes:
>
>> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> It's been proposed on this list that we should rename MySQL ports e.g. 
>>> mysql51 -> mysql-5.1; this would be to match the existing new ports 
>>> mariadb-10.0 and mariadb-10.1. Consistency is good, especially within a 
>>> particular type of software (e.g. MySQL in this case) but renaming MySQL 
>>> ports is more problematic than renaming most ports, because MySQL ports are 
>>> database servers and users may have databases and config files in their 
>>> default version-specific directories which the user would manually have to 
>>> move.
>> Consistency is good, but I'd argue not especially critical. If migrating a 
>> particular port or set of ports would be too much work, it would not be the 
>> end of the world if we left it/them.
>>
>> Consistency of variant names is probably more important than consistency of 
>> port names, since it affects variant inheritance.
> This is an important point, thanks.

Variant names, however, are easily changed with help of TCL magic. This is not
as easy for whole ports.
(Ex.: keeping the old variant around, which "only" activates the new variant if
it itself is activated, to ensure a smooth upgrade path. Much like the no_foo =>
foo variant changes.)


>>> The problem with dashes in port names is that a dash is not a legal 
>>> character in a variant name because it is confused with the syntax for 
>>> disabling a variant, and often when there are multiple versions of a port, 
>>> other ports will want to reference those multiple versions in corresponding 
>>> variants.
>> True, but we already have tons of ports with hyphens in their names. It 
>> seems odd to me to use hyphens in some places (e.g., `py34-requests`) but 
>> avoid them in others (`gcc49`).
> Very much agreed.

port install (and other subroutines) already recognize "gsed-bar+foo-baz" as one
port name, so the problem is (currently) not a problem anymore.

IIRC current base requires variants to be delimited by a white space from the
port name.  A version number is already delimited by "@" (with or without white
space after port name, so "@" is indeed an invalid port name character), with
variants following the version number (which naturally may contain dots, but not
'-' or '+'?)

>> Matching variants and dependencies is certainly nice, but I don't think we 
>> should get hung up on it, since the dependencies are added automatically. I 
>> personally would be entirely fine with `+gcc4.9` pulling in `gcc-4.9`, and I 
>> think the hyphenated port names look cleaner. This is entirely subjective, 
>> of course.

This issue could be fixed by requiring white spaces after/before each individual
variant. But we probably don't want to go there.


>>> The only disadvantage I see to the old naming scheme is ambiguity [...]
>> I haven't done any tests, but I'd much prefer adding the periods, if 
>> possible.
> I agree with this, too.

Yes. Ambiguity should be avoided at all costs.


Mihai
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev

Reply via email to