On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Kuba Ober <k...@mareimbrium.org> wrote: > Ok, I presume we can keep the port names and only issue wxWidgets28 when > 30 becomes stable. So I won't be pushing for any wxWidgets port renaming.
> 1. Some wxWidgets-using projects abandoned support for 2.8. What projects? > 2. Even for projects that support both 2.8 and 2.9, like, say wxMaxima, the > users > may want to compile it for 64 bits -- IMHO such support should be default. > It's > a bit irksome when simply installing wxMaxima pulls in a bazillion universal > ports. There are variants for that, you are not forced to build +universal, are you? > So, here's what I propose: > 1. For projects that abandoned support for 2.8, a separate package will track > the > most recent version that supported 2.8. For fityk, we'd have fityk09 > depending on > wxWidgets 2.8 (currently, or wxWidgets28 when that port materializes, that's > when wxWidgets releases 3.0). > 2. For projects that support both 2.8 and 2.9, I'd suggest switching to > wxWidgets > 2.9 (called wxWidgets-devel at the moment), and adding wxWidgets28 as a > variant. > Someone who runs into specific issues can then use 2.8 and be limited to 32 > bit builds. > I don't think that 2.9 is, in practice, any less stable than 2.8. I understand the will to refresh an old library (old meaning that OS X has moved on phasing it out) but I don't see how's that any new, things already works the way you suggest: 1) If a port doesn't support wxWidgets 2.8 the maintainer has to specify a wxWidgets-devel dependency or the port won't build (check bitcoin port) 2) If a port supports both it's up to each maintainer's to choose which variant provide and make default. The wxMaxima approach is taken from port gobject-introspection (thanks Clemens for pointing me at it): if wxWidgets-devel is active in registry then the port defaults to +wxwidgets_devel variant. To me, as an user, this is a perfectly reasonable approach: I manually install wxWidgets-devel once and the port automatically defaults to wxWidgets-devel. > One has to be careful with what "stable" means. wxWidgets-devel may not be > "stable", but many projects > are not maintaining old branches that last supported wxWidgets 2.8, or are > testing less on wxWidgets 2.8. wxWidgets' project itself defines [1] branch 2.8 as stable and 2.9 as development, this has little to do with numbering or common experience. Again, how many are these many projects of the 13 ports available? I wonder if the hassle is worth it. Regards [1] http://www.wxwidgets.org/downloads/ -- Andrea _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev