On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:11 PM, René J.V. wrote: > > I only picked the qt5- prefix because there's some precedence, though > admittedly Qt Creator has a qt4- prefix for the Qt4 version. > Similarly, GTk ports indeed have -gtk2 or -gtk3 suffixes ... though there it > might be more usual to have a GTk2 dependency be the implicit default. > >> I find the "qt5-" prefix objectionable. > > Frankly, I don't know and I don't have a real preference: I'm open to > suggestions. > We do have the likely situation where more and more ports will transition to, > or at least add support for, Qt5. As long as MacPorts doesn't provide a > mechanism to signal a port name change and thus let user installations go > from, say, QtCurve to qt4-QtCurve automatically, I don't see another solution > of the kind I've adopted in my 2 proposals (Charm and QtCurve).
Like other explained, you could use replaced_by to change the port name, so you could have both qt4-qtcurve and qt5-qtcurve for example, with qtcurve being automatically replaced by qt4-curve. My view about prefix vs. suffix: I have a somewhat strong feeling against using the prefix for Qt applications. I would use a prefix for ports and modules that are strictly related to Qt, for example qt5-widgets, qt5-webkit, qt5-sensors, qt5-bluetooth, qt5-doc, ... (basically anything that could be downloaded from the Nokia website, maybe a bit more), but I would never use something like qt5-gnuplot or qt5-wireshark. Maybe gnuplot-qt5 if it has to be, but it feels just wrong to me to prefix random applications that only uses Qt. And honestly I would prefer to keep using "gnuplot +qt5" rather than a separate port. This might be different for modules/libraries/building blocks that other applications need where you actually need to provide both versions. At least until all other dependents upgrade to Qt 5. I don't know what exactly QtCurve does, so I find it a bit difficult to judge to which category it belongs and whether a prefix is justified in that case. But again, that's just my view. Mojca PS: The only reason why I didn't switch to Qt5 in one of my ports was because Qt4 and Qt5 still conflict and I cannot afford to make my port Qt5-only, thus conflicting with many other ports. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
