On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 06:12:50PM +0100, Jeremy Evans wrote: > FLAVORs. This approach avoids that issue, so an upgrade from python > 3.2 to 3.3 would only require you bump the ports that are specifically > set to build with python 3. The only downside is if you want to > support another python implementation (i.e. jython or pypy), adding > another set of IS_* variables to every port is kind of a pain. I > don't think there are any commonly used alternative python > implementations, though, so it may not be an issue.
I don't really see a point in having every single implementation of a language under the sun in the ports tree. I've mostly said away from the ruby stuff because I don't really care, but I find the 4 distinct implementations of dubious values. The fact there is no apparent consensus as to which one is the best, well, that's not exactly a sign of language maturity...
