Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 11:13:24 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Helmut Schneider <jumper99@gmx.de>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New port, what's next? Message-ID: <5347B234.7070902@bsdforen.de> In-Reply-To: <20140410182839.GB29301@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: <xn0j0n25y421id000@news.gmane.org> <5346D5AF.5070905@bsdforen.de> <20140410182839.GB29301@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/04/2014 20:28, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:32:31PM +0200, Dominic Fandrey wrote: >> >> On 10/04/2014 18:53, Helmut Schneider wrote: >>> I created a new port, Typo3-LTS. The tgz contains >>> >>> - Makefile >>> - distinfo >>> - pkg-plist >>> - pkg-descr >>> - a diff from www/typo3 >>> >>> The file has ~150kB so I assume it's to big for a PR. >> >> I assume the bulk of that is the pkg-plist. The largest pkg-plist >> in the ports tree is 4M. In my opinion huge plists should be dynamically >> generated, but in your case I'd just I'd just temp-host the file >> somewhere and file a PR with a link and a checksum. >> >> Regards >> > > ... > autoplist is dangerous because we have no way to control that what is package is > what the maintainer expect to be packaged! therefore we often end up with > unoticed problems The majority of problems I used to have as a port maintainer stemmed from fiddling with plists. I.e. my experience is the opposite, manual plists lead to errors. Autogenerated plists (which I use in most cases, because dynamic ones are against policy) have reduced the amount of mistakes I make tremendously. -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5347B234.7070902>