<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi there</div><div><br></div>I'd rather have -docs and -l10n as options than separate ports [as it is the same distfile] -- if at all (I don't really see a good reason not to install either docs or translations -- we should ship the complete thing by default).<div><br></div><div>And then, the Makefile.common rather belongs to the kipiplugin metaport than to digikam itself. </div><div><br></div><div>Yes, I think appending a -kf5 to the ports would be the right nameing scheme here. </div><div>But again as with digkim,digikam-docs,digikam-l10n, I'm not sure if it is actually worth it to split the kipiplugins into sub-ports.</div><div>So I would suggest to simply add a single kipiplugins-kf5 port -- you may choose to do it differently of course :).</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>mfg Tobias</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 1 September 2016 at 02:35, Thomas Legg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tjlegg@gmail.com" target="_blank">tjlegg@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Thanks for the feedback and link. I've updated the Created by line and will probably push it to github when I have some time this weekend. I'm also going back and looking at the makefiles for the existing kf5 ports as to kde:5, kde, and qt5 options<div><br></div><div>I think the Makefile.common will end up staying as in many ways it seems to make handling the digikam-xxx-doc, digikam-xxx-l10n, the multitude of kipi-pluginxx ports a bit easier. Speaking of the kipi-plugin-xxx ports, none of these have a kde4 added to their name. Should I create new ports with a kf5 name (kipi-plugin-imgur-kf5)? I think I probably should as it looks like most of these kde4 kipi-plugins have disappeared.</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Thomas Legg</div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Tobias C. Berner <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tcberner@freebsd.org" target="_blank">tcberner@freebsd.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi there<div><br></div><div>Thanks a lot :)</div><div><br></div><div>1) You can modify that "Created by line" to mention you :)</div><div>2) You could probably improve that Makefile a bit, by using FOO_CMAKE_BOOL [1]. </div><div>3) I'm personally also not a fan of the Makefile.common used in digikam-kde4, </div><div> and now in this one too, it makes it more confusing to me [also it contains kde4 bits].</div><div><br></div><div>If you wan't I can import it into plasma5/PORTS :)</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>mfg Tobias</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>[1] <a href="https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-options.html#options-cmake_bool" target="_blank">https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en<wbr>/books/porters-handbook/makefi<wbr>le-options.html#options-cmake_<wbr>bool</a> </div></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 29 August 2016 at 06:46, Thomas Legg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tjlegg@gmail.com" target="_blank">tjlegg@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Would love some feedback, especially on the USES, KDE, and QT5 sections of Makefiles.<div><a href="https://github.com/thomaslegg/digikam-kf5" target="_blank">https://github.com/thomaslegg/<wbr>digikam-kf5</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>This builds digikam 5.1.0 built around a mutt version of the area51 kf5 branch. Mutt as I've rolled the kdepim back to 16.04 as 16.08 kdepim calendaring requires qt5-webengine, which seems like it's going to require a lot of work to port.</div><div><br></div><div>If using digikam-kde4, I recommend moving the .db files out of your photo repo directories and letting digikam-kde5 build new ones. I haven't tested all of the digikam features so far, but it launches, indexes, builds thumbnails, displays photos, adds tags. More testing required and if anyone else gets this to build, I'd love feedback on your use.</div><span><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Thomas Legg</div></font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>