I have a somewhat strong feeling against using the prefix for Qt
applications.
+1
I would use a prefix for ports and modules that are
strictly related to Qt, for example qt5-widgets, qt5-webkit,
qt5-sensors, qt5-bluetooth, qt5-doc, ... (basically anything that
could be downloaded from the
On Jan 17, 2015, at 4:09 AM, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote:
There's a difference between ports for which Qt represents an optional
dependency, and ports that cannot live without it. Let's face it, a Qt app
isn't so very different from a Python or Perl app: it simply extends what
On Jan 17, 2015, at 4:09 AM, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday January 17 2015 00:14:09 Mojca Miklavec wrote:
I don't know what exactly QtCurve does, so I find it a bit difficult
to judge to which category it belongs and whether a prefix is
justified in that case.
charm
Yes.
Is this supposed to be a model for going forward?
No idea.
I only picked the qt5- prefix because there's some precedence, though
admittedly Qt Creator has a qt4- prefix for the Qt4 version.
Similarly, GTk ports indeed have -gtk2 or -gtk3 suffixes ... though there it
might
correctly, Charm will create subports ala:
qt5-charm
charm
Yes.
Is this supposed to be a model for going forward?
No idea.
I only picked the qt5- prefix because there's
some precedence, though admittedly Qt Creator
has a qt4- prefix for the Qt4 version.
Similarly, GTk ports indeed have
On Friday January 16 2015 14:52:35 Craig Treleaven wrote:
The replaced_by keyword (and obsolete PortGroup) support what you've
described:
https://guide.macports.org/#development.practices.rename-replace-port
Interesting.
Qt4 (or just bit rot) are going to push projects
Bit rot, in
On Jan 16, 2015, at 4:29 PM, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote:
Bit rot, in source code?
Not literal rot, but as the operating system and developer tools move on, it
gets more and more difficult to maintain older software that is not under
active development.
I frankly don't see
On Friday January 16 2015 16:43:45 Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
To be equally blunt: the user is always right.
This is not our general attitude towards this matter.
And I rarely work on ports that I don't use or intend to use myself, so ... :)
We prefer users not be allowed to choose their
On Jan 16, 2015, at 5:09 PM, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday January 16 2015 16:43:45 Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
A buildslave will not provide archives that a user could not compile
themselves.
So the buildslaves for 10.6 run 10.6 themselves?
Yes.
Does each
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM, René J.V. wrote:
I only picked the qt5- prefix because there's some precedence, though
admittedly Qt Creator has a qt4- prefix for the Qt4 version.
Similarly, GTk ports indeed have -gtk2 or -gtk3 suffixes ... though there it
might be more usual to have
10 matches
Mail list logo
