From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 19 18:00:07 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 635801065675; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:00:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ee0-f54.google.com (mail-ee0-f54.google.com [74.125.83.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D3738FC16; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:00:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eekb47 with SMTP id b47so84283eek.13 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:00:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=r2vfbQH1Uw4RwU2Sc2h2BPR3RNeyNAwsJu9qboD9UiA=; b=ReTGYFz0ITUVZARsRg5oDr5SgyWfhUFF90l1scWdIFIsUy70kMtY57qFlvBkwGIfJ+ 6E6iITnNCfm92Wd7s5F0cTzlkZrH7OYnXkFid3NB1r2ZxJOjScDL6QswYhK8Cixg9Pk9 qJs0mWquEGMRjb89M/Sp3KUH+ktFQfuDl1Z8k= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.149.135 with SMTP id x7mr2125693eej.27.1326996004889; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:00:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.14.96.197 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:00:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20120119170425.GD23733@lonesome.com> References: <4F159530.3030306@freebsd.org> <20120119170425.GD23733@lonesome.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:00:04 +0100 Message-ID: From: Thomas Zander To: Mark Linimon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Michael Scheidell , ehaupt@freebsd.org, Gabor Kovesdan , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Edwin Groothuis Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: ports/164244: multimedia/mplayer: last update (1.0.r20111218) conflicts with devel/ncurses X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:00:07 -0000 On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 18:04, Mark Linimon wrote: > So if there's breakage, then it needs to be first understood, then > dealt with. =A0If there is no other way than the horrible backout/PORTEPO= CH > dance, then so be it. That's correct. However I think that in this situation there was no need to consider a PORTEPOCH. It was not the first temporary build problem that one of the 15k ports has and it certainly won't be the last. On a side note: I am actually proud to work with a project where one can spot a problem, report it, discuss solutions and patches and have it fixed in the official repository in (looking at http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=3D164244) less than 20 hours! There are many prestigious projects out there that cannot keep up with FreeBSD in this regard. Just sayin'. > But the takeaway is that we can't expect the PR submitters, or even > port maintainers, to get anything right. =A0It sure makes life easier > when they do, but we can't take it for granted. > As committers, we are that QA step. And we maintainers appreciate that there is a QA step represented by a committer. Trust me, I do! Still there is always the possibility that even a committer can't foresee every possible side effect that a commit could have. The main point remains imho that we as a group are able to find problems fast and fix them quickly, as we have done in this case. Regards, Riggs