Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2003 18:08:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: NO_FOO knobs in make.conf Message-ID: <20030909180341.T42161@12-234-22-23.pyvrag.nggov.pbz> In-Reply-To: <20030907183531.V3442@gamplex.bde.org> References: <20030905140628.H90946@12-234-22-23.pyvrag.nggov.pbz> <20030907183531.V3442@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 7 Sep 2003, Bruce Evans wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2003, Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > Seems this topic is a perennial favorite, so I'd like to establish
> > general agreement on a policy to deal with this going forward. I propose
> > the following "guidelines" for discussion:
> >
> > 1. All new knobs, in all branches, should have WORD_SEPERATORS between
> > distinct English words. This aids understanding of what the knob means
> > for English speakers, and more importantly, those for whom English is
> > not their first language. That, and actually having a standard are the
> > two main reasons I'm proposing this version.
>
> Does this rule apply to non-English words like SEPERATORS (sic)
Ooooo.... gettin' nasty with the spelling barbs, eh? Don't get me
started. :)
> in the above, BSD in FreeBSD, DES in DES, des in des, RELENG in
> RELENG_*, etc.? :->
Hey, one thing at a time.
> I won't complain much about the names of new variables, but
> changing the names of old variables and adding compatibility cruft
> to support 2 sets of names are wastes of time.
I disagree... I think if we're going to rev the interface, we ought to
do a clean sweep. Part of the reason that this topic comes up again and
again is that we're massively inconistent atm.
> When you change this, don't forget to enforce the change on OtherBSD for
> compatibility.
Heh.... just one small step in my plan for total DougBSD domination.
> NetBSD uses:
As commented on in the mail I just sent, I like this concept a lot,
thanks for bringing it up.
> Perhaps the real point here is that the mostly-implementation-detail names
> for the build system leaked out to user-visible names.
*nod nod* I really like the idea of having two distinct name spaces.
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030909180341.T42161>