Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 14:45:42 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.bawue.com> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/asmutils Makefile distinfo pkg-descr Message-ID: <20051130144542.GA51725@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20051130141600.GB79912@voodoo.bawue.com> References: <200511301349.jAUDnfoO032739@repoman.freebsd.org> <1133358970.85111.16.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <20051130140838.GA49598@FreeBSD.org> <20051130141600.GB79912@voodoo.bawue.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 03:16:00PM +0100, Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 02:08:38PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > What's so filthy about mkdirs? I personally enjoy seeing them in the > > > typescripts. > > > > I agree there's a fair amount of controversy with muting mkdir's. Back > > when I started porting things, I've observed that most ports actually > > muted those, so I followed that style. Since there's no general rule > > right, I felt like keeping my ports consistent WRT this. Again, I must > > say that I would be rather pleased if we'd finally come to an agreement, > > with appropriate sentence in Porter Handbook. > > You wanna get an entry in PH whether to mute or not MKDIR's ? It > just smells like another-useless-policy-request. It's just a matter > of taste if you want to hide dirs creation or not. Not a request, but rather suggestion or some soft guide-line, and not only about MKDIR, but also CHOWN/CHMOD and other "non-purely-install" things. Since we're sweep thru patch: target silently, REINPLACE_CMD's should be muted as well (and in fact, that makes the trush right now). Something similar (that is, style nits) would be useful for pkg-descr, e.g. text formatting, number of spaces after dots, list format (i.e., four-space padded, allowed chars are `*', `-', `o'), things like that. Right now, our ports collection, despite its pretty good "quantity and quality" state is rather indifferent to how it look to an end-user. Consistent descriptions, for instance, make us look better and "more professional", should I say. Of course this is a last thing we should currently worry about (first, make OPTIONS framework so it pleases everyone ;-), but since we have man style(9) for src, we should have something for ports too. portlint(1) is a huge benefit, but I often feel we can do better. I might sound excessively grumpy, but it's just my $.02 after all. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051130144542.GA51725>