Hi,
- On 15 Nov, 2014, at 21:24, Joshua Root j...@macports.org wrote:
>> If we did create authoritative validation service, would
>> portutil.tcl be a good location?
>
> Probably not, that would make it only accessible from portfile
> interpreter contexts.
Somewhere in macports1.0 would be
On 2014-11-16 06:04 , Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>
> On Nov 12, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Joshua Root wrote:
>
>> On 2014-11-12 17:14 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>>> On Nov 10, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht
>>> wrote:
>>>
I don't know that I understand these variant checks, they
seem t
On Nov 12, 2014, at 8:53 AM, Joshua Root wrote:
> On 2014-11-12 17:14 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>> On Nov 10, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>>
>>> I don't know that I understand these variant checks, they seem to not
>>> produce the same result in all cases:
>>>
>>> http://tr
On 2014-11-12 17:14 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>
>> I don't know that I understand these variant checks, they seem to not
>> produce the same result in all cases:
>>
>> http://trac.macports.org/browser/tags/release_2_3_2/base/src/port/por
On Nov 10, 2014, at 3:02 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
> I don't know that I understand these variant checks, they seem to not produce
> the same result in all cases:
>
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/tags/release_2_3_2/base/src/port/port.tcl#L289
> http://trac.macports.org/browser/tags/rele
On 01.10.2014 09:39 pm, Sean Farley wrote:
> Lawrence Velázquez writes:
>
>> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> It's been proposed on this list that we should rename MySQL ports e.g.
>>> mysql51 -> mysql-5.1; this would be to match the existing new ports
>>> mariadb-10.0 and
On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> The problem with dots in port names is that so far "port lint" has declared
>> the dot an illegal character in a variant name. This has led the perl5 port
>> for example to adopt var
On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:59 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote:
>
> On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
>
>> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>
>>> The problem with dots in port names is that so far "port lint" has declared
>>> the dot an illegal character in a var
On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> The problem with dots in port names is that so far "port lint" has declared
>> the dot an illegal character in a variant name. This has led the perl5 port
>> for example to adopt var
On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> The problem with dots in port names is that so far "port lint" has declared
> the dot an illegal character in a variant name. This has led the perl5 port
> for example to adopt variant names like perl5_16 which I've always found a
> little con
Lawrence Velázquez writes:
> Resurrecting this thread. Let's keep general renaming discussion here.
Sure, sounds good.
> On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> It's been proposed on this list that we should rename MySQL ports e.g.
>> mysql51 -> mysql-5.1; this would be to match
Resurrecting this thread. Let's keep general renaming discussion here.
On Sep 16, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> It's been proposed on this list that we should rename MySQL ports e.g.
> mysql51 -> mysql-5.1; this would be to match the existing new ports
> mariadb-10.0 and mariadb-10.1
It's been proposed on this list that we should rename MySQL ports e.g. mysql51
-> mysql-5.1; this would be to match the existing new ports mariadb-10.0 and
mariadb-10.1. Consistency is good, especially within a particular type of
software (e.g. MySQL in this case) but renaming MySQL ports is mor
13 matches
Mail list logo
