Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 16:30:41 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Jason Helfman <jgh@FreeBSD.org>, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r323495 - head/games/f1lt Message-ID: <20130724163041.GA3049@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20130723163151.GA63694@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <201307221916.r6MJG7Ln085934@svn.freebsd.org> <20130723070857.GB10232@FreeBSD.org> <51EEAC10.4000004@FreeBSD.org> <51EEAD6C.7060103@marino.st> <20130723163151.GA63694@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:31:51PM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 06:21:00PM +0200, John Marino wrote: > > On 7/23/2013 18:15, Bryan Drewery wrote: > > > Quite the contrary. If a change is needed it should be done now, not in > > > 2 months or years when it is convenient. Smaller logical commits are > > > much simpler to review and bisect than large commits. We should group > > > PORTVERSION/PORTREVISION changes together to prevent *rebuild churn*. > > > > "If a change is needed" [...] > > That said, I do prefer a couple of sweep commits let's say remove all > MAKE_JOBS_SAFE from the ports I do maintain in a single commit than doing > it 1 by 1. Exactly my point. MAKE_JOBS_SAFE is simply on-op now. Surely it's better to clean 'em up, but not on per-port basis (unless accompanied with other changes). ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130724163041.GA3049>