[MacPorts] #59834: Boost: refactor and enhance

[MacPorts]

#59834: Boost: refactor and enhance
--------------------------+----------------------
  Reporter:  michaelld    |      Owner:  mascguy
      Type:  enhancement  |     Status:  assigned
  Priority:  Normal       |  Milestone:
 Component:  ports        |    Version:
Resolution:               |   Keywords:
      Port:  boost        |
--------------------------+----------------------

Comment (by mascguy):

 Replying to [comment:34 RJVB]:
 > I see 2 reasons to spring for -dev ports : 1) size of the developer
 content and 2) making build conflicts a lot easier.
 >
 > I have never felt the need to use this approach in every single one of
 my own ports, and I agree that the endeavour to apply it throughout the
 entire ports tree would be an impossible one. But that doesn't mean one
 cannot use it where it's justified - and in this instance it would be
 easy. Ports that decide to use the new boost ports and PG will have to
 make some changes anyway, but in this case that wouldn't even be required
 (see point 2) above).

 Bear in mind that, a few short weeks ago, the `boost` ports installed
 38,000-ish files each.

 Since the recent introduction of our new `docs` variant - disabled by
 default - that's been reduced to 14,000-ish. That's almost a 3x
 improvement in file count! And it makes a huge difference, particularly
 when multiple versions are installed side-by-side.

 So we need to keep that in perspective. And while it doesn't provide quite
 as much benefit as eliminating the headers entirely [via Dev ports], the
 improvement is still quite significant.

 Nonetheless, if you still think it's worth pursuing the Dev port approach
 - despite the recent reduction in file count and storage footprint - I'm
 willing to pursue it.

 Your thoughts?

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/59834#comment:37>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for macOS