From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon May 16 01:49:14 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id D10CD1065670; Mon, 16 May 2011 01:49:14 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 01:49:14 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20110516014914.GC88914@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201105140021.p4E0LlP7029193@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20110514082018.GC97304@FreeBSD.org>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1105150744430.28608@gerinyyl>
	<20110515155920.GB19328@FreeBSD.org> <4DD01AC3.9020508@FreeBSD.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4DD01AC3.9020508@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/emulators/wine Makefile distinfo pkg-plist
	ports/emulators/wine/files patch-dlls-wineoss.drv
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 01:49:15 -0000

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 11:26:11AM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 05/15/2011 08:59, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> >bundling extra .cab file does not add plethora of extra stuff that user
> >would have to pull as extra dependencies, 2/3 increase of relatively
> >light package seems quite tolerable; in return, we provide single
> >package user can install and forget about it.
> 
> I strongly disagree with this perspective. I think Gerald is on the 
> right path, smaller and lighter packages are the way to go.

I totally agree as well when we speak of dozens of extra dependencies
and tens megabytes worth of difference.  Not when it's just single extra
static file added.  (OTOH, maybe 17M + 2/3 does indeed sound like a bit
heavy for some of us.)

Yet again, I am not against package flexibility; surely we would benefit
greatly from something like RPM %package.  For now, however, OPTIONS do
a better job most of the time, and IMHO slaves should not be (ab)used
unless being clear winners.

Disclaimer: please do not view this as criticism of Gerald's work; as
I've said, I really appreciate and value his work on Wine.  I'm just
sharing my opinion on some details of implementation and try to get my
own views WRT the subject in a better shape.  :-)

./danfe