portversion and distversion - why not?

[Kirill Ponomarew]

On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 11:32:55PM +0400, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote:
> Portlint says:
> FATAL: Makefile: either PORTVERSION or DISTVERSION must be specified, not 
> both.
> 
> Can somebody please explain why? It comes in handy
> to be able to define illegal distversion instead of redefining
> the whole distname. B.p.m was designed to handle two
> different variables in the first place. Should we really
> abstain from using this functionality?

DISTVERSION is just conform conversion of PORTVERSION, I don't see a
reason to specify both.

-Kirill