[MacPorts] #52898: revision convenience

[MacPorts]

#52898: revision convenience
--------------------------+--------------------------------
  Reporter:  RJVB         |      Owner:  macports-tickets@…
      Type:  enhancement  |     Status:  new
  Priority:  Low          |  Milestone:
 Component:  base         |    Version:
Resolution:               |   Keywords:
      Port:               |
--------------------------+--------------------------------

Comment (by RJVB):

 Replying to [comment:4 raimue]:

 > Specifying the version number twice in the same file is not convenient
 at all. You should even see a `port lint` warning for this.

 I'm not seeing any warnings, and why would lint warn against comparing
 ${version} against another variable which happens to be set to the same
 value?
 (then again `port lint` is claiming I include a PortGroup a 2nd time on
 the subsequent line which in fact includes another PortGroup...)

 > If we really need to do something about this, I could think of extending
 the version option syntax to `version <version> [<revision>]`.

 I don't see how that would help with in fact the only port where I'm
 really using this little wrapper. That one bundles the KF5 frameworks as
 over 60 subports which all share the same version but could all have a
 different revision.

 > For these kinds of mistakes it would actually be better to have a
 checker for patches against Portfiles detecting such problems (see
 checkpatch.pl for
 [https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/scripts/checkpatch.pl
 Linux] or
 [http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob;f=scripts/checkpatch.pl;hb=HEAD
 QEMU]). If the patch increases the version, but the revision was not reset
 to 0, throw an error.

 Wouldn't you get a similar problem with Portfiles that have multiple
 subports (which can have different versions and/or revisions)?

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/52898#comment:6>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS