[79310] trunk/dports/aqua

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Jun 8, 2011, at 21:31, David Baumgold wrote:

>>> New port: iTerm2
>> 
>> How does this relate to the iTerm port? (Does this conflict with it?)
> 
> iTerm2 is a fork of the iTerm project. I have this port installing to ${applications_dir}/iTerm2.app, so it shouldn't conflict with iTerm.app.

Oh yes, I misread the portfile earlier and thought it was installing to "iTerm.app".


>> Why not just update the iTerm port to version 2?
> 
> Because a fork is not the same as an update. Also, the project seems to be going by the name "iTerm2", rather than "iTerm, version 2".

Ah yes, I just noticed it's a fork. In that case, you're right, naming the port "iTerm2" is probably the best choice.


>> Does this close https://trac.macports.org/ticket/27787 ?
>> What about https://trac.macports.org/ticket/20377 ?
>> 
> 
> I hadn't seen those tickets before. This should definitely close 27787, since that ticket is simply requesting that iTerm2 be packaged in MacPorts -- and now it is. I don't think it closes 20377, since that ticket is addressing build failures in the iTerm port. If/when the iTerm project announces that its users should switch to iTerm2 instead, then we can obsolete the iTerm port, but as it is, I know there are people still using iTerm, and who might not be happy with MacPorts upgrading them to an unstable fork of the project.

According to #20377, the iTerm port cannot build at all, and I can confirm that particular build failure. I'll see if I can update iTerm to the latest version 0.10. If not, we could mark it as replaced_by iTerm2.