From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 23 06:23:26 2012
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id BD91C1065673; Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:23:26 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:23:26 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20120123062326.GA19285@FreeBSD.org>
References: <CAF6rxg=Wnh90=Nr0iuaz_HjWfenavuq1FqAHJ6Q3KpQs4sUrHA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F1CE7C7.5040706@FreeBSD.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F1CE7C7.5040706@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org>,
	cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/multimedia/acidrip Makefile
	ports/math/algotutor Makefile ports/sysutils/apt Makefile
	ports/graphics/asciio Makefile ports/devel/autodia Makefile
	ports/www/awffull Makefile ports/devel/bazaar Makefile
	ports/www/bigbluebutton Mak
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree
	<cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 06:23:26 -0000

On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 08:53:27PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 01/22/2012 08:00, Eitan Adler wrote:
> > The concern is that someone would add something extra to BUILD_DEPENDS
> > without thinking about it and thus add extra bogus RUN_DEPENDS.
> 
> That's just plain stupid. We don't remove useful tools because
> developers might make a mistake with them, especially one that's so
> incredibly unlikely to happen.

Big +1.  This is like admitting that we're too dumb to realize the difference
between assignment operators and therefore we disband its usage.  I would say
instead, learn your tools and stop considering everyone stupid.

> > I'm uncertain if there other additional reasons that portmgr dislikes :=
> 
> Hopefully before any more changes are made there will be public
> discussion about it.

I also believe this goes a bit beyond portmgr@ competence as it has nothing
to do with building packages.  portmgr@ is not entitled to make this kind of
technical changes, and never was.

./danfe