Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 12:10:30 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r365639 - head/Mk Message-ID: <20140822121030.GE2378@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201408221131.s7MBVZ0o090593@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201408221131.s7MBVZ0o090593@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:31:35AM +0000, Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh wrote: > New Revision: 365639 > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/365639 > QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r365639/ > > Log: > - Add shared JSON_C description > [...] > @@ -164,6 +164,7 @@ JAVA_DESC?= Java platform support > JBIG_DESC?= JBIG image format support > JHEAD_DESC?= jhead EXIF manipulator support > JPEG_DESC?= JPEG image format support > +JSON_C_DESC?= JSON file/format parser support via json-c > JSON_DESC?= JSON file/format/parser support This looks like of weird. Do you anticipate ports that will have to use both of these options? If not, I don't see why you cannot simply (re)use nice and clear JSON for both json/json-c. Options were never meant to always directly map to some library. Yes, sometimes they do, but this is still different layer of abstraction. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140822121030.GE2378>