On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:46:44PM +0200, Alberto Villa wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Baptiste Daroussin <b...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On of the reasons of bsd.options.desc.mk is to be able to share common > > options > > and descriptions, to have better consistency between ports and to have > > general > > meaning descriptions that make more sense, has anyone can improve the > > description of an option. > > While I really like what bsd.options.desc.mk is supposed to do, I > would like to recommend to any committer/maintainer (and I will > personally submit a patch for the soon-to-come documentation and for > the file itself) to think before always relying on on default option > descriptions. > > Sometimes just saying "Enable XXX support" doesn't mean anything to > the user, and a more explanatory text would be far better, explaining > maybe what feature one is about to enable instead of just what he is > going to depend on. > > So, please, do not hesitate to redefine option descriptions for your > ports if you feel you can add more information for the port specific > case. > -- > Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer <avi...@freebsd.org> > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~avilla
100% agree that is why it is _DESC stuff is made to be overwritten :) /me expected for the documentation patch :D regards, Bapt
pgpC5ZUpyRHgY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
