> Am 05.08.2020 um 14:28 schrieb Ken Cunningham
> <[email protected]>:
>
> I wasn't imagining a variant for binary-only installs.
That's just an idea on how this could be presented to users. Also an easy way
to identify ports that are basically binary redistribution (`port list
variant:prebuilt`). Also would allow to provide a single port both ways, and an
easy way to configure user preference via existing mechanisms.
> If a port can be built, we should build it.
Sure, let's repeat this a few more times until everyone *really* got that. :-)
> But for things we can't build, (like Zoom or Microsoft Word) installing a
> binary is the only option and some ports of this type seem to be what people
> are submitting recently.
There may be ports where providing it both ways makes sense (e.g. some ports
may not build on certain macOS/XCode versions but on others), though, so if we
can find a way to provide both in parallel, that could help.
> This is fine -- some work to maintain -- but I was just wondering if we might
> coalesce around a scheme to make it obvious somehow to users that these were
> different animals than our usual ports.
I totally agree with this, just think this is merely a starting point to
optimize creation and handling of such ports.
