Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:59:41 +0200
From:      John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur@com.bat.ru>, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-head <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r396998 - head/net/samba36
Message-ID:  <55FD4E2D.7000907@marino.st>
In-Reply-To: <20150919115157.GA99928@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201509151622.t8FGMXQY074723@repo.freebsd.org> <CALdFvJE17udNUQ=Y5JxwHphn2TWRMh-213_LfP-YOM3MN1Qx2A@mail.gmail.com> <0FAE77426236E9E47E15BFC1@atuin.in.mat.cc> <20150919072048.GA86129@FreeBSD.org> <55FD0FA4.7050306@marino.st> <20150919074241.GA96797@FreeBSD.org> <55FD3620.7060500@marino.st> <20150919115157.GA99928@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/19/2015 1:51 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:17:04PM +0200, John Marino wrote:
>> On 9/19/2015 9:42 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>> I'm fine with clear and umabiguous rules too.  I just want bumping rules
>>> to become more granular.  Plain "package changed -> need a bump" means
>>> that fixing a typo in pkg-descr would require it.  Don't you think this
>>> is a bit too extreme?
>>
>> I think there is already an exception for metadata changes such as
>> pkg-descr and COMMENT and MAINTAINER, although I don't know if this
>> exception is documented (it is done in practice).  However shebang fixes
>> are functional and definitely need a bump.  They can be the difference
>> between functioning and non-functioning packages.
> 
> Right; however, in this particular case it was *examples* what were fixed,
> which in fact are not ready to be run on FreeBSD as is.  I can totaly see
> why Timur got upset about this particular bump.

Hmm.  Two things:
1) why are non-functional examples getting installed?  I can flip this
and get "upset" that broken examples are provided by the port.
2) Let's say the example did work except for the shebangs.  I still
support bumping in that case.  Why should examples be less priority than
the main software?  Broken is broken and the presence of examples
implies they are useful.

Or in other words, if this port had not been installing broken examples
in the first place, the shebang fix never would have been made.  So I
don't think Timur has a good reason to be upset since it traces back to
him (I presume from this thread).

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55FD4E2D.7000907>