Formulae, casks, and resources have a `#livecheckable?` method that
indicates whether they contain a `livecheck` block. This is intended
to be read as "has a livecheckable?", not "is livecheckable?" (as
livecheck can find versions for some packages/resources without a
`livecheck` block). Unfortunately, correct understanding of this
method's behavior [outside of documentation] relies on historical
knowledge that few people possess, so this is often confusing to
anyone who hasn't been working on livecheck since 2020.
In the olden days, a "livecheckable" was a Ruby file containing a
`livecheck` block (originally a hash) with a filename that
corresponded to a related formula. The `livecheck` blocks in
livecheckable files were integrated into their respective formulae in
August 2020, so [first-party] livecheckables ceased to exist at that
time. From that point forward, we simply referred to these as
`livecheck` blocks.
With that in mind, this clarifies the situation by replacing
"livecheckable" language. This includes renaming `#livecheckable?` to
`#livecheck_defined?`, replacing usage of "livecheckable" as a noun
with "`livecheck` block", replacing "livecheckable" as a boolean with
"livecheck_defined", and replacing incorrect usage of "livecheckable"
as an adjective with "checkable".
This updates livecheck files to use `typed: script` where feasible.
The remaining exception is `livecheck/strategy.rb`, as I wasn't
able to figure out how to resolve the typing issues around the
`@strategies` variable (I tried a couple of approaches but couldn't
find a working solution). This includes changes to resolve the other
type errors in `strategy.rb` but leaves the file as `typed: true`
for now.
When the `--extract-plist` option was added to livecheck, conditions
were added in `#run_checks` to skip casks using `ExtractPlist` if the
`--extract-plist` isn't used and the run involves multiple
formulae/casks. This integrates the skip into the `SkipConditions`
class.
The `check_for_resources` code arguably speaks for itself, so it
doesn't feel like a necessary addition. Besides that, this cleans up
some other comments and text to better align with existing examples.
