> On Feb 19, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Clemens Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > ----- On 19 Feb, 2015, at 16:02, Daniel J. Luke [email protected] wrote: >> or we could avoid default variants (and maybe go back to having +no_foo >> variants >> for the corner cases where someone wants to build with less functionality if >> necessary). > > that sounds like a step backwards, especially since the proposed solution > isn't > all that hard to implement, but switching to +no_foo requires adjusting > thousands > of Portfiles.
perhaps. Note that I'm not volunteering to do either, so my opinion doesn't really matter ;-) In the idealized world where we have as few variants as possible, though, it's less of an issue. I think it's worthwhile to remind people once in a while that while variants are useful, it's much better to not have the extra complication they bring unless they're necessary. -- 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] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
