Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 18:48:34 +0200 From: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r320546 - in head/devel: . tradcpp tradcpp/files Message-ID: <CAF6rxgnt%2BvpD_zFVbe5GwcwZB5_gsB67SkwN5_2Xw7dPkkNVJw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130611164037.GD35160@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <201306111055.r5BAtHmb094470@svn.freebsd.org> <CAF6rxg=iqSGrFK3Ug0Hzh6nRGnzUA5-Ug_aXrGs4xybBPAty3A@mail.gmail.com> <20130611164037.GD35160@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> wrote: > No patching is better, has I'm heavily working with upstream on this port. > > In general disable warning is something I don't like, I prefer to fix them, and > I don't find that complexify the port at all. I've found patching software often leads to introducing subtle bugs: its incredibly annoying trying to track down a bug only to determine that is is a distro patch. Also, it makes it more difficult for the reader of the patch to figure out why the patch is there: it increases the mental effort before "oh, maintainer is just working around compiler warnings" That said, this isn't a strong feeling. -- Eitan Adler Source, Ports, Doc committer Bugmeister, Ports Security teams
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnt%2BvpD_zFVbe5GwcwZB5_gsB67SkwN5_2Xw7dPkkNVJw>