[KDE/Mac] Upgrade to 4.13.3 in Macports

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Sunday September 14 2014 21:01:36 Nicolas Pavillon wrote:
Hello Nicolas,

> Well, the ports will be there, and I made a tentative launchd script, so things should be around for testing. I suspect it won’t work out of box (it did not when I rapidly tried to test it), but we can improve from there. Considering that probably most users would still rely on Spotlight, it is likely that baloo will not be enabled by default on Mac OS X, even though having a working possibility could be nice.

Yeah. Again, as in kmail being able to search *in* mail messages ...

> In the case you are still working on it, I would tend to then hold before including it to the port. I would prefer not make incremental upgrades of the patch later. This  would also go well with my wish of trying to first test essentially the upgrade itself, and then include patches for improvement. 

It's up to you. Personally I'd say add the variant and let the users decide, but whatever you decide here won't affect me since I'll keep running kdelibs 4.14 ;)

> I would avoid to do that. While it makes sense to me to make a variant when it implies a user’s choice (such as wanting to use OS X keychain instead of kwallet), they are not meant to store temporary features that will ultimately be included in the main code. Considering the life cycle of a variant (we can’t just delete them right away to avoid breaking users ports), that would make portfiles a mess.

Hmm, this variant has no ambitions ever to have ports depend on it, as far as I'm concerned!

> If you are working on it, I would also tend to wait for a final version, then. But the fact that I want to separate upgrade and new features through patches is not really about the code involved, but about the unexpected bad surprises we had in several occasions when upgrading from previous versions. I want to decouple these to make the transition smoother. 

As you may have seen, I've updated the RR, and even added one for KDevelop. Turns out others had filed bugreports for the same issues that had been bugging me...

> I saw it, and while I fully see the potential interest for developing, I would strongly disagree about forcing all users to run libraries from different versions, even more if it implies using an unreleased version of the code.  This makes complete sense to me for a local portfile to ease development, though.

I did submit a port. I'd have called it kdelibs4-devel, but it should someone tell all dependents that it's equivalent to kdelibs4. Is that possible?
BTW, git/master is now preparing for 4.14.1, meaning that you ought to be able to apply my patchset to 4.14.0 .But again, that's your decision and as much as I'd like to be able to reduce the number of local portfiles I'm running, I can live on as is...

Cheers,
R.