svn commit: r345165 - head/devel/hgsvn

[John Marino]

On 3/7/2014 10:43, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:21:10AM -0800, Xin Li wrote:
>>> If you want to complain about something, complain about the removal
>>> of DIST_SUBDIR, not what was already discussed two weeks ago.
>>
>> I wouldn't mind adding that back but what's the best practice?  Do we
>> put all python ports in python unless they already have their own
>> directory (e.g. zope)?
> 
> DIST_SUBDIR is most useful in few cases (not mutually-exclusive): 1) to
> isolate group (perhaps large group) from other distfiles; 2) when distfiles
> related to a port do not look related on their own; 3) when two identically
> named distfiles (libfoobar-42.tar.gz) belong to different ports, and are
> with different contents (if contents is the same, DIST_SUBDIR should not
> be used, or be the same to reduce file duplication in $DISTDIR); 4) maybe
> something else.

The 4) maybe something else is a big one.
4) When upstream "rerolls" their distribution files.
The first time this happens, DIST_SUBDIR should get created with a
unique date.  Otherwise you could have fetch mismatches when the port
distinfo is fixed but the old distfile is still on the system.
FreeBSD has been pretty lax about rerolls; pkgsrc is much more strict
about this.

John