deactivate hack in PortfileRecipes?

[Clemens Lang]

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 08:38:41PM -0500, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> Ergh. The work is appreciated, of course, but that recipe gets
> extremely technical. Is it really necessary (or desirable) for a
> portfile recipe to dig that deeply into the internals?

I guess it's not necessary to go into the very details, but doing it
makes it future-proof should the code ever change. It was also an
attempt to
 - keep people from using the deactivate hack unless they're really sure
   they need it
 - show MacPorts internals are no holy grail and can be modified, too.
   We're currently implementing a lot of things in PortGroups that
   should probably be added to base in some way, and having the
   internals around would simplify doing that.

On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 01:59:03AM +1100, Joshua Root wrote:
> It is necessary to explain at least some of the implementation details
> if the reader is to understand what the code is actually doing and
> why.

The original request wanted a detailed line-by-line explanation, so I
wrote one :)

I don't mind you simplifying it, though.

-- 
Clemens Lang