Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:33:11 -0400 From: Steve Wills <steve@mouf.net> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel Makefile ports/devel/rubygem-pkg-config Makefile distinfo pkg-descr Message-ID: <4CB4F037.5030106@mouf.net> In-Reply-To: <20101012024226.2dc802a8.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <201010120311.o9C3BhVW079967@repoman.freebsd.org> <20101012024226.2dc802a8.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/12/10 05:42, Stanislav Sedov wrote: > > Thanks for this port! > Some things I noticed: > 1. The WWW link points to the gem's page, not the homepage. > The real homepage of the project is http://github.com/rcairo/pkg-config Thanks, fixed. > 2. It doesn't seem to depend on hoe, where this dependency come from? The rubygems.org page says it needs it, as does the metadata in the gem and the Rakefile. > 3. We usually don't use hypens in the portname, and portlint wanrs > about this afaik. It'd be better to name the port rubygem-pkgconfig I agree it's somewhat ugly, but it seems correct to me. I haven't found a warning for it in portlint, but maybe I'm not using the right flags (-abctCN) > 4. We usually prefer static pkg-plists instead of dynamic ones, especially > in simple ones. Although it's totally a maintainer consideration, > it is usually nice to have a plist you can search in with grep. I agree it can be nice to be able to search. I just copied another rubygem-* port. Perhaps RUBYGEM_AUTOPLIST should be removed? I see 123 other ports in ports/devel alone which use it. > 5. Although also a maintainer's choice I find it better to have > non-gem versions of the libraries when they're available (like in > this case). The reasons are that the non-gem version can be used > both in application that supports gems and the one that doesn't, > and it is possible to patch the port when it is needed. If in some > time in future you will need to patch the contents on the port, it > is impossible to do with gems. Sorry, I don't understand this. (Perhaps I should to be maintaining this port, but I don't.) Thanks, Steve -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMtPA3AAoJEPXPYrMgexuhQQEH/jYoSC0MxwgRHm3R/pdaDYVM cmyUCQac4mm01kWegvyz0NVUzcPiZzlTeO9GI767zdI6CAJhGk7bbZ17Xsykrpsh 03ANif17v5sOGGPKEIRvGZ9yVUJOUTTToj0o/tlP2vVwMdieBwK7+cG5/Gc5c8ly EBi8TbhEtXbw2Z5HsFbDv0yscP8XJrXhFiejPpaX+Cevjb/gbdimUGap3cqZwrz4 /Xo1PmanqM/3w+GJwU0fEfWoAu9b6RMFH6AlNUhN0CT4WOAXT5YKo52EwyX0c0US HF6Dd2BRIB0lsy/zaeowrUW6xeXm/Z5vwPKRAc7FjHtE8vYyBkah0Y1cwcLBjjs= =YuIy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CB4F037.5030106>