From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Aug 25 17:13:21 1996 Return-Path: owner-ports Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA27476 for ports-outgoing; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 17:13:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freenet.hamilton.on.ca (main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca [199.212.94.65]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA27464; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 17:13:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca [199.212.94.66]) by freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA14072; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 20:13:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ac199@localhost) by james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA18840; Sun, 25 Aug 1996 20:15:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 20:15:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek To: Chuck Robey cc: "Julian H. Stacey" , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to people feel about adding an AUTHOR convention to ports? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk [I switched the order of my quoting to get the main point up at the top] On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, Chuck Robey wrote: > On Sun, 25 Aug 1996, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > > If you put a lot of gratuitous stuff in your Makefile, it's just going to > discourage folks from trying to figure out how to make more ports. Bah humbug. If they're making a port, they're not likely some kind of technophobe who will cringe at the site of a few details. Remember, making a port potentially involves close examination of the ported source files, likely an examination of of the included Makefile, and who-knows what-else. It's not like you're dealing with babies who are new to computing. > > LIST_FREEBSD = hylafax@freebsd.org > > MAINTAINER = jhs@freebsd.org > > LIST_GENERIC = flexfax@sgi.com > > AUTHOR_CURRENT = sam@sgi.com > > AUTHOR_ORIGINAL = sam@sgi.com > > Julian, if it's not being used in bsd.port.mk, what possible use are the > variables? Stuff like this might be more useful as a comment, or maybe in > the DESCR file. I can't think of a single port that would need more info > than the author of the original sources, and the FreeBSD maintainer[s]. One thing that could conceviebly be useful is somewhere to report bugs. This would probably be the maintainer. A special target, 'pr' could be used to send a bug, or something like `pkg_bug'. Of course, this would just make it all the more complicated for a newuser (as opposed to a single "send-pr" program). Actually, the more I think about it the less I like it. -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk