From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org  Mon May 27 09:41:55 2019
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F278F15BE700;
 Mon, 27 May 2019 09:41:54 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)
 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256)
 (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org",
 Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DCDD8C4D7;
 Mon, 27 May 2019 09:41:54 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id 6CA1D1558B; Mon, 27 May 2019 09:41:54 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 09:41:54 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>
To: Yuri <yuri@freebsd.org>
Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org,
 svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r502676 - in head/science: . opensph opensph/files
Message-ID: <20190527094154.GA43150@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201905260408.x4Q489Sj016376@repo.freebsd.org>
 <20190526085728.GA35964@FreeBSD.org>
 <ca65087e-b8e0-aa02-5c0f-a834d665fd65@freebsd.org>
 <20190527091902.GA21784@FreeBSD.org>
 <225414dd-4a41-9645-5004-937419175b66@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <225414dd-4a41-9645-5004-937419175b66@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13)
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8DCDD8C4D7
X-Spamd-Bar: ------
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.94 / 15.00];
 NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0];
 NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.94)[-0.944,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[];
 NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree <svn-ports-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-all>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-all/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-all>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 May 2019 09:41:55 -0000

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 02:32:25AM -0700, Yuri wrote:
> On 2019-05-27 02:19, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > There is a consensus WRT PORTNAMEs as well, I'm sure you can easily
> > notice it and obtain numbers with a simple shell script.  That said,
> > please, do not use mixed cased PORTNAMEs, "distinctive and diverse
> > shape" does not help it here but only creates needless inconsistency
> > and confusion.
> 
> This is easy: if you want this rule you should create a patch for the
> PHB with this rule.

I don't want to create or enforce rules, sometimes it's OK and actually
better to bend them, but it takes certain care and taste to known when
they can be bent.  This is not the right time.

I'm just asking you to realize, particularly in this case, that your
naming is very inconsistent with all the other OpenFOO ports we have in
the ports tree.  There are no reasons how could this be any better than
to follow existing, clearly visible, and universally adhered practice.

./danfe