From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 16:20:46 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F4B0AD7; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from apnoea.adamw.org (apnoea.adamw.org [204.109.59.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 578A71E6F; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:20:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.192.25] (dhcp-108-170-169-12.cable.user.start.ca [108.170.169.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by apnoea.adamw.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 380611140A7; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 12:20:44 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: svn commit: r367002 - head/devel/cmake From: Adam Weinberger In-Reply-To: <5405EC34.8070507@marino.st> Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 12:20:41 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <57AEDB52-B216-4048-AE95-4BD8E15494DC@adamw.org> 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> <5405EC34.8070507@marino.st> To: marino@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) 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 16:20:46 -0000 On 2 Sep, 2014, at 12:11, John Marino wrote: > On 9/2/2014 17:57, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 2 Sep, 2014, at 11:47, John Marino >> wrote: >>=20 >>> 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). >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> How do you mean mandatory? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> OPTIONS_DEFINE+=3D MANPAGES OPTIONS_DEFAULT+=3D MANPAGES=20= >>>>>> MANPAGES_CONFIGURE_ON=3D --sphinx-man >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> By mandatory, I mean that a port that does that is violating=20 >>>>> policy. Documentation is optional (DOCS) but manpages are not.=20 >>>>> That's what I've understood. I've see ports that tried the >>>>> above and I've removed code of that equivalent. >>>>>=20 >>>>> John >>>>=20 >>>> If it=92s on by default I don=92t see the problem. Who are we to >>>> decide that nobody should ever be allowed to build a port without >>>> manpages? >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> If it's the policy, it's the policy. >>=20 >> That=92s ridiculous. Where=92s that policy? There=92s MANPAGES_DESC = in >> bsd.options.desc.mk. I=92m not the first person to think up disabling >> manpages. >>=20 >> 80 ports have a MANPAGES option. Should I let all 80 of those >> maintainers know that you decided they can=92t have that option >> anymore? >=20 >=20 > 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. >=20 > All this hinges on *if* it is indeed a policy. If it is, it should be > enforced. Okay well, until you=92re finished writing up your new policy, can we = make an option to prevent bringing in a dozen unneeded dependencies? # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org >=20 >=20 >=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> Sphinx is not like tex though. It's really not a big deal >>> practically speaking. >>=20 >> Bringing in a dozen dependencies is EXACTLY what options is designed >> for. >=20 > But options aren't designed to bypass policy, that's the point. >=20 > John