From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 8 21:14:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1D6C16A43A; Mon, 8 May 2006 21:14:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from msid@daemons.gr) Received: from jefferson.hostingzoom.com (jefferson.hostingzoom.com [216.118.117.94]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC7543D4C; Mon, 8 May 2006 21:14:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from msid@daemons.gr) Received: from [88.218.36.6] (port=63171 helo=localhost) by jefferson.hostingzoom.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.52) id 1FdD3d-0004jl-Ln; Mon, 08 May 2006 16:14:24 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 00:14:17 +0300 From: Sideris Michael To: Pav Lucistnik Message-ID: <20060508211417.GA16847@daemons.gr> References: <20060508200926.GA6005@daemons.gr> <1147119806.18944.59.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <20060508203709.GA32661@daemons.gr> <1147121271.18944.63.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <20060508205703.GA11215@daemons.gr> <1147122425.18944.67.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1147122425.18944.67.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - jefferson.hostingzoom.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - daemons.gr X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports structure and improvement suggestions X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:14:28 -0000 On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 11:07:05PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Sideris Michael p??e v po 08. 05. 2006 v 23:57 +0300: > > > > > > > modify the existing Makefiles to include the OPTIONS framework > > > > > > > > > > That is the goal. Please submit patches whenever you hit the old style > > > > > Makefile. > > > > > > > > Submit patches for all Makefiles? No way. That is why maintainers exist. It should be the > > > > responsibility of every maintainer. In maximum 1 week all Makefiles could be modified to > > > > use the OPTIONS framework. If you want by individuals, what can I say, I will have it done > > > > in 2 months :P Is it ok with you? Not fair I would say. > > > > > > Let's make a deal. Send an email to every maintainer, asking them nicely > > > to convert their ports. Let's see what will happen :) > > > > So you are telling me indirectly that the maintainers are bored to dedicate max 10' to > > maintain something that is their responsibility? > > Does that surprise you? Yes it does. Cause this defines an irresponsible person. And positions like these should not be occupied by irresponsible people. > > If this is the case, then give me an > > address and I will be sending you periodically patches for every port. > > send-pr(1) is fine ok. > > But we will indeed > > make a deal. You are going to apply my patches and I will never see any new ports being > > added without having the OPTIONS framework. > > Can't guarantee that about new ports, because, to use your line, I'm not > the only developer. But I will pursue any patches that convert ports to > OPTIONS. So, can't there be a standard for Makefiles and enforce ALL people to use the OPTIONS framework? Sideris Michael.