On Nov 21, 2007, at 08:10, Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
On Nov 21, 2007, at 7:16 AM, rhwood@macports.org wrote:
* Add variants with[out]_quartz and with[out]_x11 * Move x11-specific dependencies and configure/build settings to variant with_x11 * Make +with_x11 +without_quartz the default variants * Include variants quartz and no_x11 as calls to with_quartz and without_x11 until such a time as they are no longer required
+variant quartz requires with_quartz {} +variant no_x11 requires without_x11 {}
Why didn't you simply use the more standard "x11", "no_x11" and by extension "quartz", "no_quartz" variant naming scheme rather than this complex set of conflicting and required variants that you used? Something we gtk2 outsiders aren't seeing that makes it necessary?
Right. Quoting the revision further:
+# these variants are included for naming consistency with other similar ports +# IMHO all ports should use with[out]_x or [en|dis]able_x as variant names +variant quartz requires with_quartz {} +variant no_x11 requires without_x11 {}
IMHO ports should NOT use this with[out]_x or [en|dis]able_x naming convention. The existing x or no_x naming convention works great and should be continued. I know there was a long thread on the mailing list before where you advocated the new naming scheme. I failed, and still fail, to see why it's better. I think it's worse. I'm all for trying out new things in portfiles, so if you think it's better, by all means try it out for awhile. See how it goes.