From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 16:11:56 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9234C6B2; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:11:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6175A1DC2; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:11:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.31.9.154] (unknown [213.225.137.129]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43DAE435C7; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 11:11:44 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <5405EC34.8070507@marino.st> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 18:11:32 +0200 From: John Marino Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adam Weinberger , marino@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r367002 - head/devel/cmake References: <201409021339.s82DdX36038975@svn.freebsd.org> <5405E33B.3040906@marino.st> <5405E50B.1030100@marino.st> <30FDC48D-0DF1-4EBA-918D-878048101E21@adamw.org> <5405E675.1090509@marino.st> <1C547D2C-011A-41A6-AA9D-891A056DD87A@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <1C547D2C-011A-41A6-AA9D-891A056DD87A@adamw.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" , Raphael Kubo da Costa , Andrej Zverev , "ports-committers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 16:11:56 -0000 On 9/2/2014 17:57, Adam Weinberger wrote: > On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:47, John Marino > wrote: > >> On 9/2/2014 17:42, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:40, John Marino >>> >>>>>> I understand that installing man pages is mandatory, that >>>>>> it should not be OPTION controlled. A lot of ports use >>>>>> sphinx so I don't know what the big deal about sphinx in >>>>>> particular is, but lets say it's something else far worse. >>>>>> man pages could be pregenerated and installed from $FILEDIR >>>>>> right? So there are alternatives, but unless I'm wrong >>>>>> about the policy using OPTIONS is not one of them (but I'm >>>>>> wrong a lot, so let's see what the answer is). >>>>> >>>>> How do you mean mandatory? >>>>> >>>>> OPTIONS_DEFINE+= MANPAGES OPTIONS_DEFAULT+= MANPAGES >>>>> MANPAGES_CONFIGURE_ON= --sphinx-man >>>>> >>>> >>>> By mandatory, I mean that a port that does that is violating >>>> policy. Documentation is optional (DOCS) but manpages are not. >>>> That's what I've understood. I've see ports that tried the >>>> above and I've removed code of that equivalent. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>> If it’s on by default I don’t see the problem. Who are we to >>> decide that nobody should ever be allowed to build a port without >>> manpages? >>> >> >> If it's the policy, it's the policy. > > That’s ridiculous. Where’s that policy? There’s MANPAGES_DESC in > bsd.options.desc.mk. I’m not the first person to think up disabling > manpages. > > 80 ports have a MANPAGES option. Should I let all 80 of those > maintainers know that you decided they can’t have that option > anymore? I don't know if/where it's written, that's what I was told. However, it makes sense. You want uniformity. I have no moral issues fixing 80 violations and saying to the maintainers that never should have made it through a review, and use pregenerated man pages if they don't like it. All this hinges on *if* it is indeed a policy. If it is, it should be enforced. >> However, I sorta kinda think a option to not package >> man pages for all ports may be coming for embedded usage. That >> won't solve this dependency that you are trying to fix, but it will >> solve the "i don't need manpages for any port" issue. >> >> Sphinx is not like tex though. It's really not a big deal >> practically speaking. > > Bringing in a dozen dependencies is EXACTLY what options is designed > for. But options aren't designed to bypass policy, that's the point. John