Bug 222238 - audio/ardour: rename ardour to ardour2
Summary: audio/ardour: rename ardour to ardour2
Status: In Progress
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Some People
Assignee: Alexey Dokuchaev
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2017-09-11 20:16 UTC by Michael Beer
Modified: 2018-02-12 10:46 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
bugzilla: maintainer-feedback? (danfe)


Attachments
svn diff (72.86 KB, patch)
2017-09-11 20:16 UTC, Michael Beer
no flags Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Michael Beer 2017-09-11 20:16:24 UTC
Created attachment 186275 [details]
svn diff

The intention of this renaming is to use the port name "ardour" for the latest Ardour version. The latest version is currently available as port "ardour5".
However the major version number of Ardour will rather soon increase to v6.
The version the port "ardour" currently reflects is Version 2.8.x of upstream Ardour which is not maintained upstream for several years.
Furthermore the current "ardour" port doesn't build.
My plan is to rename ardour5 to ardour as soon as new release is available.

Let me know if the attached patch files are OK for this purpose!
Comment 1 Alexey Dokuchaev freebsd_committer 2018-02-12 10:22:32 UTC
The port should be unbroken as of ports r461552.  As for the renaming, yeah, I guess it makes sense.  However, it also makes sense to keep v2 around for a while: Ardour v2 sessions are forward-compatible, but once you save in later versions you can't go back.  So upgrading will be tricky for people that still have their works developed on v2.  (For this reason some GNU/Linux distros package both Ardour v2 and whatever is most recent version.)

Once I'm confident that Ardour2 (current port) builds and packages fine everywhere, I'll probably start replacing ardour > ardour2; ardour5 -> ardour.
Comment 2 Michael Beer 2018-02-12 10:46:33 UTC
Yes, makes sense. Fine with me.