[MacPorts] #31429: New portfile for SeqAn

[MacPorts]

#31429: New portfile for SeqAn
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  tre@…       |       Owner:  ryandesign@…           
      Type:  submission  |      Status:  closed                 
  Priority:  Normal      |   Milestone:                         
 Component:  ports       |     Version:                         
Resolution:  fixed       |    Keywords:                         
      Port:  SeqAn       |  
-------------------------+--------------------------------------------------

Comment(by ryandesign@…):

 I see that while I was sleeping and waiting for the port to finish
 building, much has happened in this ticket. I'll open a new ticket for the
 remaining issues I was going to address.

 To comment on some of the above:

 Replying to [comment:8 snc@…]:
 > why not have the name be lower case like the distfile?

 There's nothing wrong with mixed-case port names; they may even be
 preferable if they more accurately represent the proper name of the
 software. The port name is what the user interacts with; the user doesn't
 care at all what the distfile name is, so the case of the distfile is not
 a valid reason for choosing the case of the port name. Even the name of
 the distfile needn't dictate the port name, though it often does.

 Once upon a time the use of uppercase letters in port names was
 discouraged because there was a bug in MacPorts where uninstalling a port
 would fail if you did not type the port name with the correct case, and
 users are more likely to type the port name in all lowercase. But that bug
 was fixed years ago. Today, we have a new bug where pre-compiled archives
 are not fetched if you don't type the port name with the correct case, but
 that has already been fixed in trunk and I'm going to merge it to the 2.0
 branch soon for inclusion in MacPorts 2.0.5.

 So there's no particular reason why mixed-case port names should not be
 used. However, now that the port has been added as "seqan", I suppose we
 should leave it that way.

 Replying to [comment:16 snc@…]:
 > A side note, since you modified the distfile, we now have to add this to
 the portfile (I have it added in my copy I'm about to commit after
 feedback on openmpi).
 {{{
 dist_subdir         ${name}/${version}_1
 }}}

 Since this is a new port that had never been committed before, this was
 not necessary, but it isn't harmful either. But I would strongly encourage
 software developers never to repackage a release like this. See
 wiki:PortfileRecipes#stealth-updates.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/31429#comment:19>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for Mac OS