Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:12:14 +0000
From:      Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Boris Samorodov <bsam@passap.ru>
Cc:        svn-ports-head <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@FreeBSD.org>, "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur@FreeBSD.org>, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-all <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, marino@freebsd.org, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r361646 - in head/net/samba36: . files
Message-ID:  <20140716141214.GA64875@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <53C6846A.4060909@passap.ru>
References:  <53C322A7.2090705@marino.st> <20140714003112.GA54756@mouf.net> <CALdFvJEvf4-RSJNUVxX08T8K-tq9PoKge-XxmhDafAn_QxjEcg@mail.gmail.com> <53C451FA.2020304@marino.st> <20140715170501.GA73101@FreeBSD.org> <53C5618F.2020104@FreeBSD.org> <20140716094453.GA53961@FreeBSD.org> <53C65677.8060603@FreeBSD.org> <20140716111328.GB82901@FreeBSD.org> <53C6846A.4060909@passap.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:55:54PM +0400, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> 16.07.2014 15:13, Alexey Dokuchaev пишет:
> > I don't see why it cannot work the old way, just as described in PHB
> > section 5.2.2.1.
> 
> The quote:
> -----
> PORTREVISION should be increased each time a change is made to the port
> that changes the generated package in any way.
> -----
> 
> > That is, bump port revision when something is wrong with previous
> > package.
> 
> I'd say you are wrong here: "...changes the generated package in any
> way."

You conveniently omitted the word "should" in that sentense.  That's not
fair play, Boris.  That section also gives some examples which do not
require a PORTREVISION bump; and a nice summary at the end:

  "A rule of thumb is to ask yourself whether a change committed to a port
   is something which everyone would benefit from having (either because of
   an enhancement, fix, or by virtue that the new package will actually work
   at all), and weigh that against that fact that it will cause everyone who
   regularly updates their ports tree to be compelled to update. If yes, the
   PORTREVISION should be bumped."

> > Fixed typos or added license do not render previous packages wrong.
> > Ditto for staging, maintainership changes or other things that are not
> > user-noticeable.
> 
> "A user noticable" is a vague criteria, while "changes the generated
> package in any way" is strict one. And documented.

This criterium, while being strict, is also utterly stupid; for the reasons
I've stated earlier in this thread (gratuitous rebuilding of packages when
there's nothing wrong with them modulo some minor typo fix in COMMENT).

./danfe



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140716141214.GA64875>