Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 13:41:24 +0100 From: Frederic Culot <culot@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFT+BRAINSTORM] One USE_ to rule them all Message-ID: <20130206124123.GP57799@culot.org> In-Reply-To: <20130206104221.GH1268@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20130204181946.GF67687@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <511003B3.90600@gmail.com> <20130205232407.GM88651@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20130206091932.GF1268@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20130206104221.GH1268@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 10:19:32AM +0100, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > Lots of people are asking to change the name saying they don't like USE_FEATURES > here is the list of proposition that have been made, please vote for you > favorites :) > > USE_FEATURES: keep it as is it is cool > USE_FEATURE: please singular > USES: Why bother with something longer > USE: singular I said > FEATURES: Why keeping USE? > FEATURE: I told you singular! > > regards, > Bapt Being one of those who found USE_FEATURES a bit too long I feel I need to cast my vote now: I would go for 'USE' as it is shorter and more generic than 'FEATURE'. Indeed sets of dependencies could be mentioned here as well (equivalent of USE_XORG for example) which for me are more requirements than features. Moreover it is closer to the actual USE_* variables. Anyway to broaden the choice I also thought about the following: COMPULSORY REQUIRE REQUISITE MANDATORY WANT/WANTED NEED/NEEDED But again, 'USE' is fine by me. Regards, Frederic
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130206124123.GP57799>