On Oct 28, 2007, at 17:20, source_changes@macosforge.org wrote:
+livecheck.version uthash-1.2
[snip] In the uthash and stklos portfiles, I think you could simplify the livecheck by writing livecheck.version ${name}-${version}
On 29.10.2007, at 05:54, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 17:20, source_changes@macosforge.org wrote:
+livecheck.version uthash-1.2
[snip]
In the uthash and stklos portfiles, I think you could simplify the livecheck by writing
livecheck.version ${name}-${version}
Yes, this would also work. But "stklos stklos-0.96 released" is most probably not the message the authors of stklos intended to see (in the automatically generated RSS feed we are using for livecheck). Thats why I expect the next release to do it right and only give a version number for the RSS feed. And to remind me -- or whoever may maintain this port in the future -- of this "misbehavior", I chose to _not_ imply this to be the default behavior. -Markus --- Markus W. Weissmann http://www.mweissmann.de/
On Oct 29, 2007, at 08:15, Weissmann Markus wrote:
On 29.10.2007, at 05:54, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 17:20, source_changes@macosforge.org wrote:
+livecheck.version uthash-1.2
[snip]
In the uthash and stklos portfiles, I think you could simplify the livecheck by writing
livecheck.version ${name}-${version}
Yes, this would also work. But "stklos stklos-0.96 released" is most probably not the message the authors of stklos intended to see (in the automatically generated RSS feed we are using for livecheck). Thats why I expect the next release to do it right and only give a version number for the RSS feed. And to remind me -- or whoever may maintain this port in the future -- of this "misbehavior", I chose to _not_ imply this to be the default behavior.
Ok.
participants (2)
-
Ryan Schmidt
-
Weissmann Markus