Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Is there a formal definition of what the "Nice to have" field should contain? [...] yeah, it's not official, [...] The "official" wasn't really where I wanted to go... is there a definition of what should go to the "Nice to have" / "Optional" line? i.e. should only be ports that you can install without changing the build() function, or would you also allow dependencies which would then require the build() function to be adjusted? What if a developer can't test it (i.e. for a non-gnome user, if gnome could be an optional dep), should it be added? What if the developer thinks it's not "nice" to have, although it adds "functionality"? Even with all optional deps, should a port still be simple/debloated, or would you add every possible
Hi, On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 15:45:32 +0200, Jose V Beneyto wrote: optional dependency? What about the minimal version, should it be as plain as possible, or provide a set of functionality the packager considers sensible? Also note that this either means that ports are only partially tested, or that it's a lot more work for maintainers (to test all combination of optional dependencies).
[...] but imho isn't a bad feature to have It's interesting information for sure, however it's quite similar to gentoo's use flags once you adapt build() depending on the available dependencies.
Regards, Johannes -- Johannes Winkelmann mailto:jw@smts.ch Zurich, Switzerland http://jw.smts.ch