On Jan 6, 2012, at 8:09 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > On Jan 6, 2012, at 20:07, Mark Brethen wrote: >> On Jan 6, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: >>> On Jan 6, 2012, at 7:07 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>>> We've already had a lengthy discussion about subports, variants, or >>>> everything in one port. subports would be a fine way to go, if it was >>>> desired to have separately installable ports. It sounded like Mark didn't >>>> think that would be of advantage, and because of #16373 it would be of >>>> disadvantage because the source, which is around 370MB, would have to be >>>> checked out from the project's repository twice. >>> >>> ... which could be worked around by just making a tarball of the source >>> that should be built (which is preferred over fetching the source via >>> cvs/svn/git/whatever anyway) >> >> I don't follow you; are you saying to tarball after fetching from svn? > > Yes. > >> What do you do with it then? > > It could then be manually uploaded to our distfiles mirror, with the > assistance of our Mac OS Forge administrator, and the portfile could be > modified to fetch it. Then we could avoid the problems associated with > fetching directly from a version control system. > >
This sounds reasonable for software that is stable. Reduce has been around since the 60s. It went open source a few years ago and is being worked on; it will be in a constant state of flux. That's another reason for having a single portfile. Mark _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
