[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-mac
Subject:    Re: [KDE/Mac] Suggestion to set up a central MacPorts/KDE repository	for easy exchange of MacPorts p
From:       mk-lists () email ! de
Date:       2014-05-10 9:14:39
Message-ID: 7398C392-FB8A-49E8-BB33-9BC41E0C5A05 () email ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Nicolas,

On 10 May 2014, at 06:17 , Nicolas Pavillon <nicos@macports.org> wrote:
>> what do you think about putting those files onto a public repository [1] =

> I am not sure to see the advantage of doing that.
OK, was just a suggestion.

> I do not really expect these files to be worked on by several people so t=
hat a shared environment would be needed.
You are of course right, because you can easily send the files to Ian who w=
as
the only one asking for it. Well, I count myself as the second herewith ask=
ing. :)
With that on my mind I decided to start this thread, since I thought Brad m=
ight
be interested as well. See, there we=92re four already. ;)

> Most of the work is then usually more involved in patches to the new code
> instead of Portfiles which are rather stable, so that I would tend to use=
 the
> existing platforms (KDE bugs/Macports tickets) instead of creating a new =
one.
The MacPorts tree not only contains Portfiles, but carries also all current=
ly
needed patches in the =91files=92 folder, which allows all e.g. Ian to prof=
it from that
what you=92re currently working on until it is actually available through K=
DE
itself once your feedback has been incorporated upstream.

> My opinion is a little bit the same with this one. I still consider that =
this issue
> was specific to certain systems and not general (but it would become gene=
ral
> with MacPorts 2.3.0), so that having the patch on the ticket seemed suffi=
cient
> to me. It also means that now the two places are now not in sync. A patch=
 has
> already been committed to Macports to normally solve the issue, so that t=
he
> information at https://bitbucket.org/mkae/macports-kde/wiki/Home is now
> outdated: the older patch linked over there would break, as an improved v=
ersion
> has already been committed. This type of =93double update=94 seems to imp=
ly more
> work to me. =

If you would have been following the above repository you would have seen t=
hat it
is NOT out of sync with your changes, since I DID spot your commit and AMEN=
DED
the repository almost immediately, which is why the macports-kde repo is cu=
rrently
rather empty, except for a new portfile for a development version of konver=
sation
and few notes.

I do see that you don=92t want additional house-keeping on your shoulders, =
given
you=92re already doing so much work keeping all of KDE afloat these days.

I only suggested this approach, because I thought we all might be able to s=
upport
you in case we were having this additional infrastructure. But I admit that=
 it could
only lead to the result that you=92d have to organise your local port repos=
itory in =

such a way that it can easily be pushed into the still-to-be-introduced git=
 repo on
KDE=92s infrastructure, which is a lot of effort on your end with questiona=
ble use
for everyone else.

I conclude: I didn=92t mean to coerce anyone into such a repo. It=92s up to=
 each one
of us whether to make use of it or not. :-)

Thanks again, Nicolas, for all your work on the vast amount of KDE ports out
there on MacPorts!!!

Greets,
Marko
_______________________________________________
kde-mac@kde.org
List Information: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-mac
KDE/Mac Information: http://community.kde.org/Mac
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]