Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 19:32:40 -0500 From: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com> To: garga@freebsdbrasil.com.br Cc: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net>, Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, pav@freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: obsoleteing PORTREVISION bumps (Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/icu) Message-ID: <200802071932.42757.mi%2Bmill@aldan.algebra.com> In-Reply-To: <12565.BUtXBwYWXFY=.1202430564.squirrel@webmail.freebsdbrasil.com.br> References: <200802070531.m175VikU015939@repoman.freebsd.org> <200802071837.29761.mi%2Bmill@aldan.algebra.com> <12565.BUtXBwYWXFY=.1202430564.squirrel@webmail.freebsdbrasil.com.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
=DE=C5=D4=D7=C5=D2 07 =CC=C0=D4=C9=CA 2008 07:29 =D0=CF, garga@freebsdbrasi= l.com.br =F7=C9 =CE=C1=D0=C9=D3=C1=CC=C9: > > I don't think, PORTREVISION bump is needed in these cases -- only when > > the port itself is changed. Any changes due to build-dependencies > > (lib-dependencies among them) should be tracked independently. > > I disagree with you, i believe one of the most important ports feature is > to make sysadmins life easier. Sure, you need to read UPDATING before > update ports, but, it makes much more sense to bump the PORTREVISION of > dependant ports, when a lib version bumps, it makes life easier and sounds > more organized to me. =46ortunately, this is not a popular vote thing... No deducible information should be manually maintained. Ever. It puts burde= n=20 on humans, who are bad at it anyway and are bound to make mistakes, even wh= en=20 they are meticulous enough to try. -mi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200802071932.42757.mi%2Bmill>