*-devel ports for llvm and gcc

[Rainer Müller]

On 2016-05-04 15:20, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> In my opinion, llvm-3.8 and llvm-3.9 should really have a -devel
>> prefix as long as they provide pre-releases. The same also applies
>> to gcc6. With the *-devel naming scheme it would be easy to
>> identify the latest stable version.
> 
> I disagree. We currently have two naming schemes:
> 
> foo and foo-devel: this means the ports install different versions of
> the same software to the same places; the ports conflict and are
> drop-in replacements for one another. Other ports declare
> dependencies on this port using path:-syntax.
> 
> foo1, foo2, foo3: this means the ports install different versions of
> the same software to different places; the ports do not conflict.
> Other ports declare variants for each version they want to support.

Actually I agree with this. My request was that in addition to that any
port providing unstable/pre-release software should have a *-devel suffix.

In this case, if the port is made to track the development of what will
become LLVM 3.9, it should be named llvm-3.9-devel. Only after LLVM 3.9
is released as a stable version it should be renamed to llvm-3.9. The
ports llvm-3.9 and llvm-3.9-devel are still drop-in replacements.

Users should easily see which port provides a stable version and which
tracks a pre-release.

Rainer