Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 23:47:13 -0500 From: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> To: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r311414 - head/www/pecl-APC Message-ID: <CAF6rxgki3y0NkOd19zYuEUv6P%2BPfPdSCApH1OxOa=XO18GeuLA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201302020346.r123kLer085367@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201302020346.r123kLer085367@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 February 2013 22:46, Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@freebsd.org> wrote: > Author: sunpoet > Date: Sat Feb 2 03:46:20 2013 > New Revision: 311414 > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/311414 > > Log: > - Revert to 3.1.13 > - Bump PORTREVISION for updated source > > 3.1.14 was withdrawn by author from PECL page due to reported problems. > In order not to bump PORTEPOCH, I changed MASTER_SITES to my LOCAL where > the new 3.1.14 tarball is identical to 3.1.13 tarball from PECL page. IMHO this keeping of the wrong version number is confusing and wrong. It makes it more difficult to determine which upstream version is being referenced. Further, for a user that knows that .14 was withdrawn it makes this port seems bogus. In this case nothing is wrong with PORTEPOCH and we should not have an allergy to it. -- 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?CAF6rxgki3y0NkOd19zYuEUv6P%2BPfPdSCApH1OxOa=XO18GeuLA>