Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 22:32:23 +0900 From: "Akinori MUSHA" <knu@iDaemons.org> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/ruby-sqlrelay Makefile Message-ID: <86pt8k4t94.knu@iDaemons.org> In-Reply-To: <40BAEB3C.6050200@fillmore-labs.com> References: <200405301418.i4UEIVnF072175@repoman.freebsd.org> <86r7t16wbf.knu@iDaemons.org> <40BAEB3C.6050200@fillmore-labs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At Mon, 31 May 2004 10:22:20 +0200,
Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> I read the commit log, but the PORTREVISION reset is pureley cosmetic,
> so keeping it until the next release does not cause any problems.
>
> OTOH it makes automatic version auditing possible, which guarantees
> that tools like portupgrade will work. It is hard to check whether a
> port is just broken on a single platform or automatically read commit
> logs. If you want to have a version number going backwards, you can
> always bump PORTEPOCH. Do you think we need another mechanism/flag to
> signal automatic testing systems that everything is well? The script
> I'm running is at ports/Tools/scripts/chkversion.pl, feel free to send
> patches.
The script issued a warning mail(s) nagging about the commit, and I
made myself quite clear in the attached commit log. So, everyone on
the ports@ list that read the mail could see that I knew what I was
doing and I intentionally reset PORTREVISION. Thus the chkversion.pl
script served its purpose. What's the problem? What made you think
that you must commit the "fix" ?
I'm not opposing but just wondering.
--
/
/__ __ Akinori.org / MUSHA.org
/ ) ) ) ) / FreeBSD.org / Ruby-lang.org
Akinori MUSHA aka / (_ / ( (__( @ iDaemons.org / and.or.jp
"It seems to me as we make our own few circles 'round the sun
We get it backwards and our seven years go by like one"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86pt8k4t94.knu>