[MacPorts] #48184: [NEW] kf5-attica

[MacPorts]

#48184: [NEW] kf5-attica
-------------------------+----------------------
  Reporter:  mk@…        |      Owner:  mk@…
      Type:  submission  |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Normal      |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports       |    Version:
Resolution:              |   Keywords:  haspatch
      Port:  kf5-attica  |
-------------------------+----------------------

Comment (by mk@…):

 I am still in the process of setting up all those KF5 port files here. (I
 am in tier 3 by now.)

 Believe me, I don't want to duplicate anything unnecessarily, which is why
 I created the {{{kf5}}} port group.

 Yes, at the moment this port group is only taking care of frameworks, but
 I want to allow also normal projects depending on some variables set
 before the PortGroup command (a la {{{${KF5_PROJECT}}}} - which will
 change meaning soon).

 > There *must* be a KF5 "subset" (a collection of frameworks) that one
 will have to install anyway in order to run a productivity application
 (KDevelop, KDE PIM, digiKam, ...).

 Yes, there is, but the subset is built up of all those little KF5-ports.
 Every project has its own subset depending on their requirements.


 > Introducting countless individual ports one by one that each provide a
 single framework that is of no use in itself seems like an approach that
 won't attract a lot of interest. A single port that builds an ensemble
 that makes sense (= that you can do something with) seems a lot more
 interesting as a target to collaborate on.

 Well, in the end I could create meta-ports which might perhaps build the
 individual tiers of the KF5 frameworks.


 > That approach should also allow you to move stuff (name, description,
 version, probably a bunch of the configure args) out of the kf5 portgroup
 because they relate only to building KF5 and not building dependents (say,
 digiKam).
 > Alternatively, you'd probably want to rename the portgroup to something
 that makes it clear it's an internal include file, not something to be
 used by any other port that provides an application that depends on KF5.

 See above, the current state of the portfile and port group are only
 transitional and things will change!

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48184#comment:4>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X