[MacPorts] #46575: submission of the Charm time tracker for Qt4 or Qt5

[MacPorts]

#46575: submission of the Charm time tracker for Qt4 or Qt5
--------------------------+--------------------------------
  Reporter:  rjvbertin@…  |      Owner:  macports-tickets@…
      Type:  submission   |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal       |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports        |    Version:
Resolution:               |   Keywords:
      Port:  Charm        |
--------------------------+--------------------------------

Comment (by rjvbertin@…):

 Replying to [comment:6 mk@…]:
 > BTW, please consider this:

 For the future ... but what's the point in adding extra noise by
 prepending "patch-" to all .diff files?

 > you use a tagged version, as your latest update does. :)

 If I understand correctly, livecheck has an option to detect new commits?
 How?
 I'm not sure I see the importance of that, unless it also shows the commit
 messages so one can assess if there's reason to update the port?

 Where do the checksums come from, and why did you remove "/monthly" from
 the long description?

 Also, any better suggestions for the Qt5 subport name? "q5-Charm" to be
 more in line with the perl ports? Charm-qt5? Or should I inverse the whole
 logic because the original build system will prefer Qt5 over Qt4 (without
 any added functionality that I can see)?
 Or ... simply respect that choice (maybe with a variant to force the use
 of Qt4 because that's my own preference, and a variant is probably easier
 to drop, at least conceptually)?

 I agree that, contrary to QtCurve, Charm could put the Qt version
 selection in a variant, because ultimately there's little use to having
 both versions installed.
 And when I say ultimately here, it's exactly that: I think we're in a
 period where at least for certain applications it *could* be of interest
 (to certain users) to have both versions installed.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/46575#comment:8>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X