From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sat Sep 17 14:09:51 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6F59BDE2BA for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1AFDF0F for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id CD212BDE2B9; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCCD6BDE2B8 for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "wonkity.com", Issuer "wonkity.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 976A9F0E for ; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id u8HE9o67028925 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:09:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id u8HE9nW9028922; Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:09:50 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:09:49 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Jim Ohlstein cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Checking port option descriptions In-Reply-To: <3de26d31-e4e0-ddc4-27ae-03bab473849b@ohlste.in> Message-ID: References: <3de26d31-e4e0-ddc4-27ae-03bab473849b@ohlste.in> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (BSF 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:09:50 -0600 (MDT) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:09:52 -0000 On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Jim Ohlstein wrote: > Hello, > > On 09/16/2016 11:52 AM, Warren Block wrote: >> Ports options ask the user to make a decision on whether to enable that >> option. Option descriptions are critical for this, giving the user >> information to help them make that decision. >> >> Unfortunately, what is clear to the porter is often not clear to a user. >> The Porter's Handbook says "Do not just repeat the name", but this still >> happens, either exactly, or with a description that adds no information. >> >> For example: >> >> XYZ Enable XYZ >> >> The description here adds no information. The name of the option itself >> tells the reader that this is for enabling or disabling a feature. The >> option asks them to make a decision, whether to enable that option or >> not, or even just to leave it at the default, but does not give them any >> help in making that decision. Let's improve that: >> >> XYZ Include protocols for use with XYZ servers >> >> This gives the reader some additional details. > > "[S]ome" being the operative word here. I don't disagres with your basic > premise, but the truth is, at the end of the day it's up to the user to > understand the consequences of his decisions. If a user doesn't know what > 'XYZ' is, then adding 'Include protocols for use with XYZ servers' probably > doesn't tell him or her that much. On the other hand, if a user knows what > 'XYZ' is, then 'Enable XYZ' is likely enough information with which to make a > decision. Certainly the user is ultimately responsible. On the other hand, it is irresponsible to force the user to choose without giving what help we can. Especially since we have a framework which makes that easy to do!