Re: multi-variant packages and bulk builds

[Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>]

> Keeping the list of enumeration variables in one place in IMO much
> preferable as this list is constant and means that filtering logic can
> be done in one place.
One place in pbulk, one place in distbb, one place in bb framework etc.
Three places in total. Is this still "one place"?

"This list is constant"? I don't think so. Now pkgsrc supports
multi-variant packages only for python/php/apache. But real candidate
to be fourth already exists. It is emacs. Currently binaries for emacs
"modules" are built for only one version of emacs according to
EMACS_TYPE variable.  I personally don't think this is good. As a
maintainer and author of textproc/dictem I'd like to see the following
binaries: emacs21-dictem, emacs22-dictem and xemacs-dictem. The same for
other emacs modules. There are lots of them.

So, "this list" is not constant and may be extended in the future.
And in this case there is no reason to add new multi-variant packages
(appropriate variable names) into "one place": pbulk, distbb
bb framework etc., even if "this list" is not very big in pkgsrc today.


A few weeks ago you've added new variable BOOTSTRAP_PKG to pkgsrc
which is set to "yes" for bootstrap packages. I guess this is for your
pbulk. Right? Why you don't keep this constant list in "one place"? ;-)

Newly created BOOTSTRAP_PKG variable does the same thing for bootstrap
packages as VARIANTS variable does for multi-variant packages.

-- 
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.