From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 29 05:23:13 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6600E106564A; Tue, 29 May 2012 05:23:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB7B152759; Tue, 29 May 2012 05:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4FC45D40.4060200@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 22:23:12 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> References: <4FBA618A.1050707@freebsd.org> <20120521155736.GA79323@DataIX.net> <4FBA6FEB.1000706@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <4FBA6FEB.1000706@quip.cz> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Michael Scheidell Subject: Re: PHP 5.4.0 : lang/php54 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 05:23:13 -0000 On 5/21/2012 9:40 AM, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > I think that the best will be to not have any default "php5" port and > just use php52, php53, php54, php5X, php60... as we have apache20, > apache22, apache24, or mysql50-server, mysql51-server, mysql55-server. > > There is no default apache2 or mysql5-server, so there is no confusion > what is / what will be installed. > > Then it can be choosed in make.conf what version will be used as > default, similar to WITH_MYSQL_VER=51 or APACHE_PORT=www/apache22 I have been advocating for this for years. IMO we shouldn't have *any* unversioned ports for things that have multiple simultaneous versions supported. I've actually done this for the things I support (most notably bind*) for a long time, and have never had a single user complaint. OTOH, the user confusion, broken systems, and generally huge amount of hassle caused by moving the default version of an important port like php to one that isn't compatible with the previous default only has downsides. In the days when the total number of ports, and the number of versioned ports, were both much smaller, the idea of a "default" version made sense. Neither has been true for a decade or more. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection