Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:05:31 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: Lars Thegler <lth@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/converters/p5-String-Multibyte Makefile ports/converters/p5-Unicode-IMAPUtf7 Makefile ports/databases/p5-CDB_File-Generator Makefile ports/databases/p5-DBD-Excel Makefile ports/databases/p5-DBD-LDAP Makefile ports/databases/p5-DBIx-AnyDBD Makefile ... Message-ID: <1127293531.58280.18.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> In-Reply-To: <43311976.4070608@FreeBSD.org> References: <200509201420.j8KEKYa6066950@repoman.freebsd.org> <433100DE.2040901@FreeBSD.org> <43310DF2.8010100@FreeBSD.org> <43310F88.3040702@FreeBSD.org> <43311976.4070608@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
Lars Thegler píše v st 21. 09. 2005 v 10:27 +0200:
> Doug Barton wrote:
> >>> In at least one case (the port above) the pkg-descr file was not
> >>> updated to
> >>> reflect this change. Is this something that would be useful to do?
> >>
> >> I believe the 'signature' in pkg-descr has the same semantics as the
> >> 'Whom:' line in Makefile, indicating the initial creator of the port.
> >> As least that is how I read porters-handbook.
> >
> > I read "your name" in 3.2.1 as meaning "the name of the person who
> > maintains the port." The creator's name is memorialized in the comment
> > section of the Makefile, I don't see how duplicating that information in
> > pkg-descr would be useful.
>
> I see you point; however, the exact same reasoning can also be applied
> to the maintainer name in the Makefile.
>
> So in either case, it seems the 'signature' in pkg-descr is redundant.
> Either it reflects the creator's name, duplicating the comment section,
> or it reflects the maintainer, duplicating the MAINTAINER= line.
>
> I wonder what the rationale for the 'recommendation' in 3.2.1 was? Anyone?
I believe it just documented the common practice. I'm personally go
with removing the recommendation.
--
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
A two-eyed cyclops would be a bicyclops.
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBDMSJantdYP8FOsoIRAuq/AJ9iwvkEaQkMx0+O2QrRZLLBz43JgACeJIcl
FWeziVtnOwk/hCze3LbjZOo=
=mkta
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1127293531.58280.18.camel>