Having + in the PORTNAME is a pain, and should be avoided. As the GitHub project is called powerdxx, maybe this port should be called that too. (even if it installs a powerd++ binary.)

Not installing the man page is a very bad idea, this is FreeBSD, not Linux, we install the basic documentation with our software. And then, there is only one file which installation is controlled by the DOCS option, remove it, and always install the README.md file.

In D5510#117460, @mat wrote:

Having + in the PORTNAME is a pain, and should be avoided. As the GitHub project is called powerdxx, maybe this port should be called that too. (even if it installs a powerd++ binary.)

There is a lot of precendence:

> find /usr/ports/ -type d -name \*++\*
/usr/ports/science/voro++
/usr/ports/science/crf++
/usr/ports/games/xgalaga++
/usr/ports/sysutils/powerd++
/usr/ports/textproc/libxml++26
/usr/ports/textproc/libxml++26-reference
/usr/ports/benchmarks/bonnie++
/usr/ports/lang/tolua++
/usr/ports/lang/libstdc++_stldoc_4.2.2
/usr/ports/net/smm++
...

Naming the github project powerdxx was a workaround.

Yes, and because other people did stupid things does not mean you have to.

Please don't.

In D5510#117709, @mat wrote:

Yes, and because other people did stupid things does not mean you have to.

Please don't.

Everyone seems to think you are right, just like you, no one is giving me a reason. Very frustrating.

I'll go with the only one I could come up with myself - no characters with special meaning in a regexp.

There is that, yes. Also, subpackages, that are coming soon™, need a separator, that won't be anywhere in the package name, the + would be nice.

In D5510#117726, @mat wrote:

There is that, yes

Should that be a policy? I.e. should I draft an update to the package naming conventions?

. Also, subpackages, that are coming soon™, need a separator, that won't be anywhere in the package name, the + would be nice.

The would mean renaming 65 packages. Doable I guess, Also there a 348 ports with a . in the name.