[MacPorts] #40139: frescobaldi @2.0.10

[MacPorts]

#40139: frescobaldi @2.0.10
------------------------------+--------------------------------
  Reporter:  davide.liessi@…  |      Owner:  macports-tickets@…
      Type:  submission       |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal           |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports            |    Version:
Resolution:                   |   Keywords:
      Port:  frescobaldi      |
------------------------------+--------------------------------

Comment (by davide.liessi@…):

 Replying to [comment:1 ryandesign@…]:
 >  * The standard modeline should be added and the portfile's whitespace
 should be changed to conform to it (indentations at multiples of 4 spaces)
 Will do (also in #40138).
 >  * Variants whose names begin with "no_" are deprecated and should not
 be added to new ports. Instead use positively-named variants and enable
 them by default using default_variants.
 >  * It's usually insufficient for a variant to merely add or remove a
 dependency. Usually configure arguments, environment variables or patches
 have to also be used to ensure that the software does not include support
 for the given feature in the event that the user has already installed the
 dependency but not selected the corresponding variant.
 >  * Do there actually need to be variants to remove portmidi or py-
 python-poppler-qt4? Is there any problem with just leaving them enabled
 all the time and dispensing with the variants?
 frescobaldi works correctly as an editor with or without portmidi or py-
 python-poppler-qt4, which are used to preview MIDI and PDF output within
 the program.

 I added those variants because portmidi is declared as optional even by
 the author and maybe some people don't want to install poppler with qt4
 variant (because this needs a long build time on the user machine).

 Other than that, I can't see any reason to avoid PDF and MIDI preview, so
 I think I will remove the variants.
 If you prefer to keep the variants, I will address your previous
 observations.
 >  * The python 1.0 portgroup is usually used to build python modules; I'm
 surprised to see it used here to add python variants to a non-python-
 module port. Does that actually work?
 frescobaldi is entirely written in Python, so I thought that I should use
 python portgroup.
 The program (as the author says in
 https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/blob/master/INSTALL) doesn't have a
 build phase, but the install command is the same as provided by python
 portgroup.
 I could avoid the python portgroup and manually specify the install
 command, I just thought it was more convenient to use the portgroup.
 What do you think?

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/40139#comment:2>
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X