Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 08:45:42 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Mark Felder <feld@freebsd.org>, Niclas Zeising <zeising@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r349818 - head/www/nginx Message-ID: <20140409084542.GB10692@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <131A373C19AA83C05705C628@atuin.in.mat.cc> References: <201404010040.s310e5en074822@svn.freebsd.org> <5342F077.8000105@freebsd.org> <C72A0BB6-90BF-4456-ABD1-5F51AD352946@FreeBSD.org> <20140409060926.GA94220@FreeBSD.org> <131A373C19AA83C05705C628@atuin.in.mat.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 10:06:18AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > Well, no, it is *not* what a mentor should say. PORTREVISION and PORTEPOCH > should be set when they need to be, they should not be avoided because > someone think they're ugly. [...] Mathieu, while what you (and PH) says is correct, it does not mean that we should not put any thinking when it comes to bumping PORTEPOCH. Surely tools exist to be made use of if it helps to solve the problem; but every solution comes at a price, and careful/experienced committer would probably have selected better one. Often "better" means "less ugly", and I do not see why any mentor should not encourage their mentees to select the least ugly/intrusive choice among equally functional ones. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140409084542.GB10692>