On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:41, Jeremy Lavergne
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The "default" version that zmq would depend on could be a subport of the port 
> it depends on, no? That'll make it easier to just move a line or two from the 
> "default" portfile.

True, I was avoiding getting too far into implementation; trying to
stay at the hierarchy level.


On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:59, Ryan Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> We shouldn't repeat the "perl5" antipattern any further. Perl should have 
> been using "port select" all along; I don't know why it never did.
>
> However, there is talk of offering only perl 5.14 and deleting the others, so 
> changes to the perl selection mechanism should perhaps wait until a decision 
> on that is reached.

That's why I left it at "as with perl currently". I probably should
have just left that option off entirely, given what's been discussed.


-- 
arno  s  hautala    /-|   [email protected]

pgp b2c9d448
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev

Reply via email to