From nobody Thu Jan 02 13:42:36 2025 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YP7Dw2hmZz5jDr9 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 13:42:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from www121.sakura.ne.jp (www121.sakura.ne.jp [153.125.133.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4YP7Dv5KhCz4LXD; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 13:42:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from kalamity.joker.local (124-18-43-234.area1a.commufa.jp [124.18.43.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by www121.sakura.ne.jp (8.17.1/8.17.1/[SAKURA-WEB]/20201212) with ESMTPA id 502DgaAd012970; Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:42:36 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dec.sakura.ne.jp; s=s2405; t=1735825357; bh=4bBwlw0y4e3T612H7L2wxLLyUbRN8Q6ckGN5HB00m/0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=QbuafZGwZLYPAXtlPPXmf6inkuNRiDIpblOpmSRKrt7zB29rxmJIIP+4t6FzmJDwr XiLRf3T9cZc6WKSTPdkL06Wf+4uGH0FR/U8vhbiRrVX4DXH8WIt13oHYnKM49Kn5VX KOHxSGtTr7L1JFsqZPp0gRBZLBn0FkdzLwmZq7HQ= Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:42:36 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: Guido Falsi Cc: Graham Perrin , ports-list freebsd Subject: Re: editors/ghostwriter 24.12.0 versus x11/kde5 Message-Id: <20250102224236.a8a6922e4ad278d936713850@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: References: <20250102015351.9fdbbf3dd4142d6d6c783060@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <20250102093845.f1dfd723ac310e0b18bf7074@dec.sakura.ne.jp> <20250102215721.520d809cdec040ff64233950@dec.sakura.ne.jp> Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; amd64-portbld-freebsd14.1) List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4YP7Dv5KhCz4LXD X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7684, ipnet:153.125.128.0/18, country:JP] On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 14:05:23 +0100 Guido Falsi wrote: > On 02/01/25 13:57, Tomoaki AOKI wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 08:41:27 +0100 > > Guido Falsi wrote: > > > >> On 02/01/25 01:38, Tomoaki AOKI wrote: > >>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 19:50:50 +0100 > >>> Guido Falsi 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. > > > > A flavor is an option that would force me to be the maintainer of an > outdated software, something I'm not willing to do. > > So another port with a separate maintainer is the only way to go. > > While technically it would be possible to have separate MAINTAINER > values for flavors, it would be quite difficult to draw the lines in > relation to responsibilities in case of problems. Agreed. I don't intend to force anyone anything. Just proposing different possibilities for the future (in mail archives to be searched). This is mostly because I've wondered which way to go, whether any better way exist or not, when I've filed Bug 276165 [1]. There was multiple ways to go, each had Pros and Cons, and finally chosen the one I've filed. Anyway, I'm currently not using editors/ghostwriter (as I don't want any ports depending on www/qt[5|6]-webengine to be newly installed), so doing fork or not would be on whom actually want to do and maintain. And why I've popped in this discussion is because I've lost qterminal as of conflicts (I've overlooked the switch to qt6 and addition of kf6 dependencies, thus, missed to lock it. And reverting after that could cause new dependency hell). I've switched back to x11/mate-terminal now, as I've found the workaround when it failed to build. [1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=276165 Regards. > > -- > Guido Falsi > -- Tomoaki AOKI