> > On Aug 21 22:58:07, j...@macports.org wrote: > >> On 2018-8-18 06:06 , Clemens Lang wrote: > >>> I think the idea of the size keyword is to start to use it to display > >>> download progress bars for servers that do not send a Content-Length > >>> HTTP header (or do not have an equivalent of such a header due to the > >>> used protocol). This is currently not implemented. > >>> > >>> 'port -v checksums' does generate the size field in newer versions of > >>> MacPorts. Until such a version becomes the released default, I think > >>> it's fine not to require adding it in PRs. > >> > >> Not accepting PRs until they add it is certainly not a good approach. > >> Recommend using it in all the docs, certainly. But don't put extra > >> burden on both contributors and reviewers for the sake of an > >> unimplemented minor feature. > > > > https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/2371 > > has been rotting for two weeks for exactly that. > > In this case, you removed the size from a port that already had it.
Yes, because it needlessly polutes the Portfile, much like 'platforms'. It doesn't add anything. > This is actively undoing the work of other contributors. Yes; like if you remove a needless dependdency, which someone took pains to include properly. > Please try not to undermine what the rest of us are doing. You don't seriously mean that in preparing https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/2371 I tried to undermine the work of others, do you.