Query: variant +docs or +doc?

[Richard L. Hamilton]

How would that work with regard to "port upgrade" of installed ports?  Would (for those ports presently using the one chosen to be changed) both be accepted for compatibility?  Or some other magic?  Or would people end up having to explicitly deactivate the installed one, and install the new version with suitably altered variant(s) requested?

Seems to me the latter would be a nuisance best avoided.

> On Apr 14, 2019, at 14:58, Michael Dickens <michaelld at macports.org> wrote:
> 
> See < https://trac.macports.org/ticket/58338 > with title "lots-o-ports: decide on common variant name to build documentation: +docs or +doc".
> 
> There are approximately 128 ports that use +doc or +docs as the variant to build documentation. Of those, approximately 75 use +docs, while the rest -- approximately 53 ports -- use +doc.
> 
> [[I say "approximately" because I did a global search in the ports tree using a specific pattern ("variant doc " and "variant docs " with the extra space) as well as just {"variant doc" | grep docs}, the latter of which returns slightly different results (& I can think of lots of reasons why but the result are similar; hence "approximately ...).]]
> 
> Because we can individually set global default variants, one could choose to set both here to get documentation to build, but I'll agree with Blair that just setting one is preferable. Hence, it would not hurt to, as a group of developers the users of MacPorts, decide which variant name should be the sanctioned way to build documentation, and then tweak those non-conforming ports to use the correct variant name.
> 
> Please direct your thoughts to that ticket to keep everything easily in one place. This email is mostly to direct your attention to this specific ticket / topic. Thanks! - MLD
>