Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:19:23 +0100 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/libvanessa_adt Makefile pkg-plist ports/devel/libvanessa_adt/files patch-ltmain.sh Message-ID: <200403242319.23829.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20040324135025.A88409@qbhto.arg> References: <200403231608.i2NG8XmM046696@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040324165038.GB3323@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040324135025.A88409@qbhto.arg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Boundary-02=_rlgYAbghDe42qOX Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 24 March 2004 22:52, Doug Barton wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, David O'Brien wrote: > > Agreed WRT bumping PORTREVISION. Why does it seem almost all ports > > committers today think PORTREVISION must be bumped with ever single > > commit?? > > Two reasons come immediately to mind. The first is inadequate training > by mentors (which is a self-perpetuating cycle). The second is the well > entrenched human proclivity to twist a knob simply because it exists. Most PORTREVISION bumps lately were done to help getting ports linked to=20 bumped shared-library revisions of dependency libraries. Those are=20 mass-bumps, but they are deemed useful and necessary by portmgr to avoid th= e=20 situation where people have ports linking to stale library revisions for=20 ages, causing hard-to-debug trouble much later when almost everybody alread= y=20 forgot about the update (portupgrade's feature of preserving old=20 shared-library revisions, while generally useful, makes this rather easy -= =20 perhaps too easy). The (due-soon) shared-library-revision bump of glib20 will bring another ro= und=20 of such bumps. However, for glib20 marcus@ has been sending mail to all=20 maintainers of possibly affected ports and asked if ports should be exclude= d=20 from bumping - this is a good way to handle it and should probably be made= =20 standard procedure for any PORTREVISION bumping of a similar scale. For=20 example, simply by taking dependency information from the package registry,= =20 almost all ports maintained by kde@ would have needed bumping - after the=20 manual review, this list has been cut down to just eight ports. =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --Boundary-02=_rlgYAbghDe42qOX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBAYglrXhc68WspdLARAgWKAJ9yNB7c2v7HmdqIV7+Bac6hWT0G0wCfTysk hetnPoOJxUbTcTM/vWNeK4c= =WTXl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_rlgYAbghDe42qOX--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200403242319.23829.michaelnottebrock>