Re: editors/ghostwriter 24.12.0 versus x11/kde5

On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:41:27 +0100
Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On 02/01/25 01:38, Tomoaki AOKI wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 19:50:50 +0100
> > Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> Don't see a good reason to force everyone to use an old version.
> >>
> >> Anyway the ports tree is open source, nothing stops anyone from
> >> proposing (with himself as maintainer) a new port for the old version
> >> calling it "ghostwriter-qt5" or whatever.
> > 
> > Or flavorizing with qt5/kf5 version alone stick with latest possible
> > (older than ones for qt6/kf6) version until KDE6 becomes default
> > on ports.
> 
> I'm not sure putting VERSION under flavors control is 
> supported/suggested. Would make managing the port quite more complicated 
> anyway.

Yes. Is complicated.

For example, mail/claws-mail is ver. 3.21.0 for Gtk2 and 4.3.0 for Gtk3.
This is because upstream is deveoping Gtk2 version on 3.x branch and
Gtk3 version on 4.x branch.

And here, I've mis-remembered. It was using OPTION, not FLAVOR.

  https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/mail/claws-mail/Makefile
  https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/mail/claws-mail/Makefile.claws
  https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/mail/claws-mail/Makefile.ver

But there is no reason (putting aside the complexities like above) that
FLAVOR cannot do the same thing, just technically, though.


> A separate port for the older version would be more reasonable, the name 
> I suggested for such a port it is also suboptimal. The name should have 
> at least an indication this is an old version.

Exactly. It would be simpler. Using FLAVOR/OPTION is just another
possibility.

Regards.

> Best regards!
> 
> 
> -- 
> Guido Falsi <madpilot@FreeBSD.org>


-- 
Tomoaki AOKI    <junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp>