From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Tue Dec 26 06:49:30 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@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 77E6CEA558D; Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:49:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 520C3675F2; Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:49:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 80EEC1C212; Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:49:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:49:29 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Joseph Mingrone Cc: Adam Weinberger , yuri@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, jwb@FreeBSD.org, mat@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r456674 - in head/graphics: . libQGLViewer libQGLViewer/files Message-ID: <20171226064929.GA27490@FreeBSD.org> References: <201712182143.vBILhFND023143@repo.freebsd.org> <20171224135522.GA1693@FreeBSD.org> <6fa2551a-dee7-9388-07fc-6539800b6c5a@freebsd.org> <20171225112028.GA61880@FreeBSD.org> <86h8sel8iw.fsf@phe.ftfl.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86h8sel8iw.fsf@phe.ftfl.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 06:49:30 -0000 On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 06:58:31PM -0400, Joseph Mingrone wrote: > The Porter's Handbook does touch on this in '5.2. Naming'. "Set > PORTNAME to the base name of the software", could be interpreted as: Use > the same case authors use. The example in '5.2.5. Package Naming > Conventions' says "No uppercase names for single programs." > > In a recent review, Mathieu wrote, > "The port should be named [with the case used upstream], the only > exception is when it installs a single binary and that it makes more > sense to have it referenced by the thing you want to run than the > name of the project[.]" The thing is that Mathieu somehow believes that if he's on portmgr@ and can edit the PHB, his sole, private opinion automatically becomes "the one true one". He is wrong here, and luckily most people do not folow this strange, unbacked advice of his. > If we could decide on something, maybe the Porter's Handbook could be > clearer. Yes, PHB is buggy in this area. It proposes something that we never actually did during entire ports tree history and utterly confuses new contributors. ./danfe