[MacPorts] #30324: Cherokee Portfile Update to 1.2.29 with new Variants

[MacPorts]

#30324: Cherokee Portfile Update to 1.2.29 with new Variants
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
 Reporter:  stahlstift@…          |       Owner:  macports-tickets@…                   
     Type:  update                |      Status:  new                                  
 Priority:  Normal                |   Milestone:                                       
Component:  ports                 |     Version:  2.0.0                                
 Keywords:  haspatch              |        Port:  cherokee                             
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Changes (by ryandesign@…):

 * cc: ryandesign@… (added)


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:2 stahlstift@…]:
 > I thought you stop maintaining the port. I hope you want to be still the
 maintainer ;)

 Actually I have never used, maintained, or had anything to do with this
 port before. I'm just responding to your proposed patch with some comments
 about how ports should generally be written.

 > rrdtool got much depends which I don´t need for example at my
 devmachine. I didn´t know about that convention. So it would be better to
 make them default and let user like me the possiblity to -rrdtool?

 Ok, I see your point. rrdtool does have a lot of dependencies. It can be a
 variant then. But as I said, the port must take whatever measures are
 necessary to ensure that rrdtool does ''not'' get used if the user does
 ''not'' select the rrdtool variant, even if the rrdtool port is already
 installed. All you've done in the variant so far is add the dependency,
 which is insufficient. Investigate whether there are configure arguments,
 environment variables, or patches that would be needed to accomplish this.

 Whether rrdtool should be a default variant is a separate question, and
 depends on whether "most users" would want this functionality or not.

 > I don´t want why anyone want to use no_nls - but the configure got the
 option.

 That's not a good reason. Yes, configure scripts have many options, but
 most of them should not be exposed to MacPorts users. It's the job of the
 portfile author to choose good defaults, and possibly provide a few
 variants for one or two options the user might actually care to switch on
 or off.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/30324#comment:3>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for Mac OS