pypi

[Lawrence Velázquez]

On Jun 22, 2015, at 5:18 PM, Mojca Miklavec <mojca at macports.org> wrote:

> OK, I agree. Something in the Python PortGroup could take care of
> these settings, but in any case the defaults should not influence all
> python ports. You would end up with
>   PortGroup python 1.0
>   pypi_something something

I'm not sure how this would happen?

The idea would be to set defaults for master_sites, distname, and livecheck.type (and maybe a couple of others) for module ports (not applications). Explicitly setting those in the port (which lots of Python ports already do) would override the defaults, so the behavior would not change. Most ports would actually shed some boilerplate.

What I'm not sure about is the interaction with other portgroups that also set defaults for those. I expect the order of inclusion matters, so python-1.0 should come first. Hopefully the number of Python module ports that use extra portgroups is small.

> What is a good alternative for them?

I prefer the way the python-1.0 and php-1.1 portgroups work.

I started a brief thread about this a few weeks ago, to which I shamefully never responded.

https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/2015-June/030745.html

>> I do not think we should not create any more of them.
> 
> Wasn't that the double negation? ;)

Gah >.<

>> I hope you don't think I was berating you; I just wanted to let you (and everyone else) know that there are some nice shortcuts now (as of ~2 days ago) :)
> 
> No, of course not. I wasn't aware about the option. Thanks for
> pointing it out, even though if you want to inform the others, you
> might want to do that in a different way. I have a tendency to delete
> e-mails with subject that looks like a reply to a SVN commit and so
> might others.

WAIT, SOME PEOPLE DON'T READ ALL THEIR EMAIL?!? my whole life has been a lie

vq