On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 05:40:08PM -0600, Warren Block wrote: > On Wed, 30 May 2012, 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. > > Deja vu: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html#AEN2598 > > Look at the second tip. That's brand new, added because users were > complaining in the forums recently. (And before, but recently got my > attention.)
Thank you!! > > > 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. > > Some of the entries in the KNOBS file could use better descriptions > also. Let's focus on bsd.options.desc.mk descriptions improvements as the KNOBS file will die $soon :) ($soon being undefined yet :) regards, Bapt
pgpuEKXYdXp1B.pgp
Description: PGP signature
