Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:07:41 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] UNIQUENAME patches Message-ID: <4FDCA13D.8010302@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CADLo83-phZB1X-QxNbMie1Gm2kOXfbOMZ8WmGRJpj6BcR8emCQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <4FD8AFEC.6070605@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo83-Pr5Qqa6oUFKmfbLuuDOCiDQoiLVvjPfvJ1fT8ou0h9g@mail.gmail.com> <4FDC9488.2010509@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo83-phZB1X-QxNbMie1Gm2kOXfbOMZ8WmGRJpj6BcR8emCQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigE0FCD84DA310F0481165A415
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 16/06/2012 15:26, Chris Rees wrote:
> On 16 June 2012 15:13, Matthew Seaman <matthew@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> On 16/06/2012 14:18, Chris Rees wrote:
>>> That's great-- though rather than patching colliding-only ports, can'=
t
>>> we just add the category to it?
>>>
>>> .for cat in ${CATEGORIES}
>>> UNIQUEPREFIX?=3D ${cat}
>>> .endfor
>>>
>>> (copying the code from PKGCATEGORY; might be better off moving the
>>> PKGCATEGORY code up higher and just using that).
>>
>> Yes. I thought long and hard about doing that, but I opted not to for=
>> two reasons:
>>
>> 1) Using the port name + a uniqueprefix where necessary produces wha=
t
>> is close to the minimal change required to give every port a
>> unique name. The UNIQUENAME won't actually change for quite a
>> lot of ports under my scheme.
>>
>> 2) As a way of future-proofing against reorganizations of the ports
>> tree. What tends to happen is that a new category is invented
>> and a number of ports are moved into it. My way should avoid
>> changing the UNIQUENAME in the majority of cases.
>>
>> Remember that changing the UNIQUENAME changes where the record of the
>> port options are stored, and either we annoy a lot of users by making
>> them fill in a buch of dialogues all over again, or we have to invent
>> some complicated mechanism copy the old options settings to the new
>> directory. (Yes -- this sort of thing will occur with the changes as
>> written. It can't be avoided entirely.)
>>
>> Plus I think it would be more natural and easier for maintainers and
>> end-users to talk about (say) "phpmyadmin" rather than
>> "databases-phpmyadmin."
>=20
> Very thoughtful, OK. You'll also need some sort of cronjob then to
> yell at people who duplicate UNIQUENAME then, rather like erwin's
> LATEST_LINK script; ports/Tools/scripts/check-latest-link.
http://people.freebsd.org/~matthew/uniquename/uniquecheck
needs to grow the capability to send e-mails.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey
--------------enigE0FCD84DA310F0481165A415
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk/coUQACgkQ8Mjk52CukIwHnwCePr8UcRbJZyLs5ACGK9jLhWUi
S68AnR4I7GLRZkzzuGZj3apkpvH+fGpd
=51de
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigE0FCD84DA310F0481165A415--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FDCA13D.8010302>