Hi all! Glad you took up this subject again. I have meant to return to this, but things always come between.
Just to clarify, my main objective is to *rename* the existing proj ports and the latest version would always be ‘proj’. The ports that do not support the new 8+ API will still have its proper dependency (proj7, proj6 etc.). In PROJ version 5 through 8 the API was transformed, this means with version 8 the “old” API was abandoned. SAGA, for example, still only support the old API, thus the proj version 7 is the latest one supported. Cheers, Nicklas > On 8 Sep 2023, at 16:52, Sergey Fedorov <vital....@gmail.com> wrote: > > I have obviously forgotten to try the new Proj with R ports back then, and > atm away from native PPC hardware; so from my side I would prefer not moving > to a newer Proj right-away. > Switching to explicit proj5 port should be perfectly fine, of course. (And > then R ports won’t prevent anything else from updating.) > > New Proj should work with R packages, but let me wait until I can test that > on PPC. > > On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 9:38 PM Dave Allured - NOAA Affiliate via macports-dev > <macports-dev@lists.macports.org <mailto:macports-dev@lists.macports.org>> > wrote: > As a contributor to ncarg (proj5), I like this change. Currently there are > only 10 ports that depend on the traditional "proj" which is really proj5 > under the hood. Collectively there are only 3 maintainers plus a few > nomaintainers, and Sergey has already approved for several of the R ports. > > So I see the migration for this group of "proj5" ports as quite simple. As a > first step, could we add an explicit proj5 port, such that proj and proj5 > co-exist temporarily and are exactly the same? That could be done safely > now, with no impact on anything else. Then after migration of those 10 > ports, "proj" could be easily switched to the latest upstream version, as > proposed. > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 2:09 PM Sergey Fedorov <vital....@gmail.com > <mailto:vital....@gmail.com>> wrote: > IMO that makes sense. > > My R ports are supposed to support more recent versions of Proj than 5, but > since that is untested locally (and also requires minor adjustments to > configure args besides swapping version number), it is perhaps safer to keep > them at Proj5 for now (I guess that is also simpler for you?). > Then I can move them to a later or the current Proj in a while. > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 3:54 AM Nicklas Larsson via macports-dev > <macports-dev@lists.macports.org <mailto:macports-dev@lists.macports.org>> > wrote: > Hello all, > > I'd like to propose to simplify the maintainance of the PROJ ports, which has > become unnecessary cumbersome and in many cases leading to installments of > multiple versions only because different ports are out-of-sync in respect to > default proj variant. > > The PROJ ports available now: > > port version > --------------- > proj4 4.9.3 > proj 5.2.0 > proj6 6.3.2 > proj7 7.2.1 > proj8 8.2.1 > proj9 9.2.1 > > It would be better to use the port name 'proj' for the latest version > available > (independent of major version), which now is version 9.2.1. The present port > 'proj', which is version 5.2.0, should be renamed to 'proj5'. Like this: > > port version > --------------- > proj4 4.9.3 > proj5 5.2.0 > proj6 6.3.2 > proj7 7.2.1 > proj8 8.2.1 > proj 9.2.1 > > The day when there is a new major version, e.g. 10.0.0, the 'proj' port will > be > updated accordingly and 'proj9' will keep the 9.x.y version: > > port version > --------------- > proj4 4.9.3 > proj5 5.2.0 > proj6 6.3.2 > proj7 7.2.1 > proj8 8.2.1 > proj9 9.2.1 > proj 10.0.0 > > The ports with 'proj' dependency, which are actively updated and maintained, > will in this way be kept in sync with less risk of installing multiple > versions. > Ports, which do not support later versions of PROJ, can keep the pinned > version. > > List of ports with proj[x] dependency: > > R/R-lwgeom path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-proj4 path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-reproj path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-rgdal path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-sf path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-terra path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > R/R-vapour path:lib/proj5/lib/pkgconfig/proj.pc:proj > databases/mysql55-lib_mysqludf_fproj4 port:proj4 > databases/postgis port:proj4 > databases/postgis2 port:proj6 > databases/postgis3 port:proj[6-9] > databases/spatialite-tools port:proj[6-9] > databases/spatialite port:proj[6-9] > gis/gdal port:proj[6-9] > gis/grass port:proj[6-9] > gis/grass7 port:proj[6-9] > gis/liblas port:proj[6-9] > gis/libosmium port:proj4 > gis/mapnik port:proj4 > gis/mapserver port:proj[6-9] > gis/mod_tile port:proj4 > gis/osm2pgsql port:proj8 > gis/qgis3 port:proj[6-9] > gis/qlandkarte port:proj4 > gis/qlandkartegt port:proj[4-7] > gis/saga port:proj8 > graphics/libgeotiff port:proj[7-9] > octave/octave-octproj port:proj8 > perl/p5-alien-proj port:proj[6-9] > perl/p5-alien-proj4 port:proj4 > python/py-cartopy port:proj8 > python/py-pyproj port:proj8 > python/py-spatialite port:proj4 > science/cdo port:proj8 > science/gerris port:proj > science/magicspp port:proj6 > science/metview port:proj6 > science/ncarg port:proj > science/relax3d port:proj7 > science/sumo port:proj4 > science/vapor port:proj4 > science/wgrib2 port:proj8 > science/xastir port:proj4 > > What do you think, could this be a good way to go forward? > Suggestions, opinions? > > Best regards, > Nicklas >
