[kf5parts] Add new port

[leha-bot]

Fixes: #31538.

• Changes comply with the maintainer guide
• The name of the port matches an existing name for this component on https://repology.org/ if possible, and/or is strongly associated with that component on search engines.
• Optional dependencies are resolved in exactly one way. For example, if the component is built with CMake, all find_package calls are REQUIRED, are satisfied by vcpkg.json's declared dependencies, or disabled with CMAKE_DISABLE_FIND_PACKAGE_Xxx
• The versioning scheme in vcpkg.json matches what upstream says.
• The license declaration in vcpkg.json matches what upstream says.
• The installed as the "copyright" file matches what upstream says.
• The source code of the component installed comes from an authoritative source.
• The generated "usage text" is accurate. See adding-usage for context.
• The version database is fixed by rerunning ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committing the result.
• Only one version is in the new port's versions file.
• Only one version is added to each modified port's versions file.

[Cheney-W]

CMake Error at D:/downloads/tools/cmake-3.25.1-windows/cmake-3.25.1-windows-i386/share/cmake-3.25/Modules/FindPackageHandleStandardArgs.cmake:230 (message):
  Could NOT find Gettext (missing: GETTEXT_MSGMERGE_EXECUTABLE
  GETTEXT_MSGFMT_EXECUTABLE)

error log: https://dev.azure.com/vcpkg/public/_build/results?buildId=89693&view=artifacts&pathAsName=false&type=publishedArtifacts

[Cheney-W]

The above suggested changes are only recommendations. If you are willing to adopt them, please click "ready for review" after making the modifications. If you do not wish to make any changes, please click "ready for review" directly. That way, I can be aware that you've responded.

[leha-bot]

Yes, addressed the review comments and updated the branch

[Cheney-W]

    find_package(KF5Parts CONFIG REQUIRED)
    target_link_libraries(main PRIVATE KF5::Parts)

Usage test passed with x64-windows triplet.

[dan-shaw]

Repology tells me the common package name for this is kparts, can we rename that? And most of them are still on major version 5.

[leha-bot]

@dan-shaw , hello, I think we can, but there is a problem that another KDE Frameworks have port names like kf5<framework>. I think that it makes sense to rename it to kparts, but we also have to rename the rest frameworks; I think that it may be resolved like qt5 vs qt packages 🤔 ...

[leha-bot]

So, Am I create new PR with kparts "meta-port" (like qt does with qt5)? If I will rename this port, then this is would be inconsistent with a rest of KDE Frameworks ports.

[Cheney-W]

@dan-shaw What is your opinion on changing the ports of all 36 kf5 in vcpkg?

[leha-bot]

(to clarify, I'm not against this ports renaming, I think that we may go futher faster if merge my PR and would make a new PR with bulk renaming (or adding "virtual port" like "qt" and "qt5" 😊 ))

[leha-bot]

Thank you!