From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Mar 26  9:21:21 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua (alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua [212.9.224.15])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 547DD37B41B; Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:21:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ipcard.iptcom.net (ipcard.iptcom.net [212.9.224.5])
	by alcatraz.iptelecom.net.ua (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA06945;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 17:52:56 +0200 (EET)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from vega.vega.com (h171.229.dialup.iptcom.net [212.9.229.171])
	by ipcard.iptcom.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA82893;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 17:52:54 +0200 (EET)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1])
	by vega.vega.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g2QFoOi28457;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 17:50:24 +0200 (EET)
	(envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <3CA0990E.25246AFD@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 17:51:42 +0200
From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>
Organization: Vega International Capital
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject: [Proposal] Moving utility targets out of bsd.port.mk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-ports.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-ports>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-ports>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

[BCC: portmgr@FreeBSD.org]

Hi folks,

Earlier today when walking through PRs assigned to a portmgr@ I've
noticed that there is a quite large class of PRs proposing a new
utility targets for bsd.port.mk ("utility targets" here are targets
not used during ordinary `make package clean' process, such as
makesum, fetch-recursive etc.). Since those targets provided for
user's/developer's convinience only and don't affect
package-generation facility (bento cluster) or Joe Ordinary User, it
would be nice if we allow to ports committers to modify/extend them
without explicit portmgr@ approval.

My proposal is to move out those targets into another file (say
<bsd.port.util.mk>) and allow ports committers to play with it freely
using ordinary peer-review process. This will solve several problems
at once:

1. Number of PRs assigned to portmgr@ is reduced and hence portmgr@
could concentrate on more important things;
2. bsd.port.mk bloat is more controllable;
3. better separation of core functionality from "optional" one;
4. much shorter time between new feature proposal and its availability
to the users.

I do not see any significant drawbacks of this proposal and ready to
do actual work.

Any comments are appreciated.

Thanks!

-Maxim

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message