[MacPorts] #41630: dmenu @4.5: new submission

[Jean-Philippe Ouellet]

On 12/4/13 8:24 AM, Jean-Philippe Ouellet wrote:
> On 12/4/13 4:12 AM, MacPorts wrote:
>> #41630: dmenu @4.5: new submission
>> -------------------------+--------------------------------
>>   Reporter:  jpo@…       |      Owner:  macports-tickets@…
>>       Type:  submission  |     Status:  new
>>   Priority:  Normal      |  Milestone:
>>  Component:  ports       |    Version:  2.2.1
>> Resolution:              |   Keywords:
>>       Port:  dmenu       |
>> -------------------------+--------------------------------
>>
>> Comment (by ryandesign@…):
>>
>>  Replying to [comment:2 jpo@…]:
>>  > You'd only want to disable it if your x server complains about it (in
>>  which case you'd know it's xinerama from the logs), and you'd definitely
>>  want to be able to disable it
>>
>>  In what circumstances would the X server complain about this? How would I
>>  for example reproduce such a complaint on my system?
>>
>>  > Am I not understanding something correctly?
>>
>>  I'm just trying to avoid the proliferation of unnecessary variants, so I'm
>>  just trying to verify that this variant is actually needed in real-world
>>  situations.
> 
> What would probably break it is bad configuration, and it works with the
> default configuration, so I suppose it's fine to adopt the point of view
> that if it's broken it's your fault and your responsibility to fix it.
> Still though, I don't see the point of forcing it one way or the other
> (forcing people to have working xinerama support, or forcing dmenu to be
> built without support for it).
> 
> From a user's point of view I can't see why not having it as an option
> would be desirable.
> 
> Is the reason for wanting to have less variants so that the buildbot has
> less work to do or something?
> 
> I'm bringing this to the list instead of just replying in the ticket
> because I'd like to better understand when it's appropriate to add
> variants and when it isn't, and I think such a discussion would be worth
> having on the mailing list archives (or really, I think it belongs
> somewhere in section 4.4 of the guide) for better visibility instead of
> just in some ticket that gets closed and forgotten.

Because I was even thinking about adding another variant with a patch
that adds xft support.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 946 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20131204/c719cb25/attachment-0001.sig>