Date: Sat, 29 Feb 2020 03:34:17 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: Mateusz Piotrowski <0mp@freebsd.org> Cc: Mathieu Arnold <mat@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: When to use TMPPLIST instead of pkg-plist? Message-ID: <CAP7rwcgB0JJyg3FF7ZgefSY8CqpwBBnaqky5YVv3UgYidzi0vg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <a78ca75b-1596-ce0e-ccd5-f21210e16045@FreeBSD.org> References: <dcaeaa79-3fad-2a8f-97ca-b73b8486118f@FreeBSD.org> <20200228231533.y2ezerqj7ypuyc7q@atuin.in.mat.cc> <a78ca75b-1596-ce0e-ccd5-f21210e16045@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 3:02 AM Mateusz Piotrowski <0mp@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On 2/29/20 12:15 AM, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:06:19PM +0100, Mateusz Piotrowski wrote: > >> Do we have any (perhaps unwritten) policy for when to use TMPPLIST? And when > >> should a port maintainer stick to pkg-plist? > > We do not. A port maintainer should stick to pkg-plist. > > That's what I thought. > > Is there a reason for it? Does it all boil down to that fact that > pkg-plist is much more explicit and easier to debug/review? Or there is > another reason? That, and maintainers knowing when a change impacts what gets installed. Explicit pkg-plist can be irritating, but that happens for precisely the same reason that it's beneficial. It's a pretty useful check. That said, TMPPLIST is there for a reason and there's no problem with leveraging it when the situation calls for it. The one true guideline on when it's appropriate is "to solve a problem that pkg-plist can't fix," and in general committer instinct has been quite good as to when it's needed. # Adam -- Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAP7rwcgB0JJyg3FF7ZgefSY8CqpwBBnaqky5YVv3UgYidzi0vg>