On Jun 26, 2007, at 8:02 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Jun 25, 2007, at 22:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:However, I do think that having a +server variant is pointless and addsneedless hassle, and probably the result of a paranoid standpoint on security.
Having paranoid standpoint on security is usually a fairly good thing ;-)
So James has just given up maintainership of mysql5 (see r26483), leaving just me, and I would like to make +server the default, and have a variant for turning it off for those few people who don't want it.
Why is this better than doing what the postgres ports do?Having two ports lets other ports depend on what they want. (Say something requires just the mysql client libraries, it can depend on the mysql port and then if later someone wants the server, they just install the server port). With just the variants, if I install first with +no_startupitem/+no_server for some reason and later want the server, I need to uninstall and then reinstall without that variant.
I don't believe that having two the ports would add additional confusion for end-users (but I could probably be convinced otherwise).
What are the arguments against doing it that way? -- 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-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
