Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:54:04 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: xfce@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 262883] The pkg package name for x11-wm/xfce4 should be changed from xfce to xfce4 Message-ID: <bug-262883-28711-ZrMAwJU0r7@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-262883-28711@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-262883-28711@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D262883 Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|maintainer-feedback?(xfce@F |maintainer-feedback+ |reeBSD.org) | CC| |madpilot@FreeBSD.org Status|New |Open --- Comment #1 from Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> --- Hi, Thanks for reporting this. While I do not dismiss your worry right away, things don't look so clear cu= t to me as you imply. In fact I don't feel like taking a decision by myself, I'd like to get feed= back from other committers and contributors before any action is taken on this. To give a timeframe, the naming of this metaport has been like this for a l= ong time, this is the commit which set it to "xfce": https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/commit/?id=3D73097a726707ebe313ebbe450c3731d= f14ad431c (referencing on the current git repo, at the time we were still using CVS) An important consideration to make is that changing the pkgname of a port is quite invasive, all users would have to tell pkg to move to the new one. Al= so renaming the port directory has consequences, for example all users using l= ists of origins (for example for poudriere, but also scripts and configuration management systems can digest those) would requires users to change their configurations. So any of these changes has to stand a POLA challenge, that means: is the "astonishment" imposed on users who would have to perform special steps to = keep up with the change acceptable when weighted against its advantages? The advantage you claim is conformance. Which may not be worth reverting a = 19 years old change and forcing all users of xfce to reconfigure their systems. Also there is no real rule for package names to equal the port directory na= me, in fact most flavored ports for different python, perl and php versions end= up with a package name that is not aligned with their directory name in the po= rts tree. I've not looked up for more examples. My impression is that a more correct fix would be to change the directory n= ame from x11-wm/xfce4 to x11-wm/xfce, since it is quit improbable we will never have more than one major xfce version in the tree anyway, and the actual na= me ISS xfce. But Personally I'm open to any options, as long as it creates as little astonishment/confusion/need for manual intervention for users and committer= s as possible AND some consensus is reached on it. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-262883-28711-ZrMAwJU0r7>