Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 11:47:25 +0100 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Proposal for an additional (sub)section in the porters handbook Message-ID: <1133779645.59675.30.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> In-Reply-To: <20051205112918.4x1fceccg0k8wssk@netchild.homeip.net> References: <20051204151945.29aae42d@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <4393913E.3020902@FreeBSD.org> <20051205094053.50p5wfogg8g4404o@netchild.homeip.net> <1133775145.59675.15.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <20051205112918.4x1fceccg0k8wssk@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-2/LIthuxMDswjHiMJI4i
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO8859-2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Alexander Leidinger p=ED=B9e v po 05. 12. 2005 v 11:29 +0100:
> Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>=20
> > Alexander Leidinger p=EDse v po 05. 12. 2005 v 09:40 +0100:
> >> Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >> > Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> >
> >> >> Some maintainers prefer to use install-time plists. While the use o=
f
> >> >> them is not forbitten, maintainers have to use commit-time plists
> >> >> wherever possible.
> >> >
> >> > See, as soon as you use "have to", you've negated any purpose of you=
r
> >> > addition past political rhetoric. The entire thing could be shortene=
d
> >>
> >> Ah! Pav, did you referenced to this as being "political" as well? I th=
ought
> >> you talked about the "benefits"-list. Ok, I will change this.
> >
> > Possibly.
> >
> > I have an experience that every extra sentence equals to a percentage o=
f
> > readers not reading the text at all. Thus, I prefer to keep the texts i=
n
> > Porter's Handbook down to the minimum, while saying everything
> > important.
> >
> > Think law book. You don't justify the rules in the law book. You just
> > say this will be done, this can be done, this is prohibited.
>=20
> Uhm... now I don't know where to go. If we talk about a law book I prefer=
to
> talk with "must" and "must not" instead of "should" and "should not". My
> main motivation to not use "should" is the way a "should" is handled in
> RFC's. It's a "you do *not* have to care about this", but the intend of t=
his
> additional section is "you *have* to care about this".
Yeah, this is not an RFC, thanks god. You can put "We really like to see
a static plist whenever feasible." and no one is gonna sue you about it.
It's all about the fun and games, in the end, right? This is not worth
hard policy and fighting. But it's good to have an official doc in hand
to beat lazy maintainers over the fingers with.
--=20
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
A cow is a sphere that emits milk into all directions.
At least to a first approximation.
-- An unknown physicist
--=-2/LIthuxMDswjHiMJI4i
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Toto je =?iso-8859-2?Q?digit=E1ln=EC?=
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_podepsan=E1?= =?iso-8859-2?Q?_=E8=E1st?=
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_zpr=E1vy?=
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBDlBq9ntdYP8FOsoIRAgprAJ9YmnsGitG9YF5Ee8pl42hRm0VBcACgnH0K
500DDTx9+7JADJsTghPH2nI=
=PANS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-2/LIthuxMDswjHiMJI4i--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1133779645.59675.30.camel>