Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 13:33:56 +0300 From: Vitaly Magerya <vmagerya@gmail.com> To: Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] New framework options aka optionng Message-ID: <4FC5F794.9050506@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4301C0E3-3C53-46E2-B5A5-7BD120CD775F@FreeBSD.org> References: <4301C0E3-3C53-46E2-B5A5-7BD120CD775F@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Folks, when moving forward with optionsng, do we want to convert NOPORTDOCS and NOPORTEXAMPLES to options everywhere? I fear that if we do, way too many ports which otherwise have no options will start asking if I want the docs -- which I don't really care either way (unless that brings in new dependencies). Maybe it would be best if ports which otherwise don't have options, and for which building docs don't require new dependencies would not put DOCS and EXAMPLES into options? What do you think?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FC5F794.9050506>