[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Sections in Makefile (Makefile-example v.s. pkglint)
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 08:56:17PM +0900, OBATA Akio wrote:
> For LICENSE line, it is exactly after COMMENT in
> But for pkglint, it is expected that it is in the next "Legal issues"
> (RESTRICTED, NO_*_ON_*). Which is correct?
I talked with numerous people when the licensing info was extended for
all packages, and our consensus was that this is pertinent to the
metadata on the package itself, so it sits best where it is.
Personally, I'm happy we have this information anywhere in the
Makefile, and don't understand why it needs to be in a single,
immutable and unmoving position, but I realise I'm at odds with
certain parts of the developer community on this one.
As to conflicts between a style-checker and consistent practice
throughout pkgsrc? I'd pick pkgsrc any time.
> For that matter, in Makefile-example, BUILD_DEPENDS is in the third
> but pkglint said, "Legal issues", "Technical restrictions" then
> "Dependencies" section.
See above - it's probably just an artefact of the example Makefile
being out of date wrt current practice.
Main Index |
Thread Index |