Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Dec 2017 13:51:29 +0000
From:      Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>
To:        FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Can we have multiple flavors for a port?
Message-ID:  <6ed4ac6e-a075-0fc0-a3da-371a46a9e977@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--QBPaTdMXOpgPTMeoAvp144KEAiJ4ejXsW
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="IXLIIW62j4afIMwUmXRMeaVUt6kVA2VJN";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Matthew Seaman <matthew@FreeBSD.org>
To: FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <6ed4ac6e-a075-0fc0-a3da-371a46a9e977@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Can we have multiple flavors for a port?

--IXLIIW62j4afIMwUmXRMeaVUt6kVA2VJN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


I have a review up to add a USES=3Ddjango --
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12592 which I'm now modifying to be FLAVORS
compatible given that has hit the tree.

Now, we currently have ports for 4 different versions of django (1.8,
1.10, 1.11, 2.0) and the obvious next move is to add django-based
flavouring.  Currently, most django ports depend on django-1.8, with a
few depending on django-1.10, but this I think is mostly due to inertia
and django ports should be compatible with more recent versions.  Having
four different versions of django in ports seems excessive -- so, for
the sake of argument I'd cut that down to just django-1.11 and django-2.0=


But this is all python code, and the python flavouring would also apply..=
=2E

Given that django-2.0 requires python-3.5+ we end up with the following
combinations:

   py27 django111
   py36 django111
   py36 django20

and there's some 104 django ports which will mostly end up needing all
three of these variants built -- so as combinatorial explosions go, it's
not particularly earth-shattering.

However, my questions are:

  - Is it possible or desirable to have multiple flavourings like this?

  - If so, what should the syntax look like for specifying a particular
combination?  eg. www/py-django-mezzanine@py27+django111 ?

	Cheers,

	Matthew



--IXLIIW62j4afIMwUmXRMeaVUt6kVA2VJN--

--QBPaTdMXOpgPTMeoAvp144KEAiJ4ejXsW
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=FB53
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--QBPaTdMXOpgPTMeoAvp144KEAiJ4ejXsW--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6ed4ac6e-a075-0fc0-a3da-371a46a9e977>