Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 14:09:56 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, Jean-Marc Zucconi <jmz@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/games/doom Makefile ports/games/doom/files patch-ag patch-sndserv__soundsrv.c patch-sndserv__wadread.c Message-ID: <20051011040956.GC1239@k7.mavetju> In-Reply-To: <434B2841.3@FreeBSD.org> References: <200510101133.j9ABXWg4000289@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051010125906.GA3640@FreeBSD.org> <20051010234044.GB1239@k7.mavetju> <434B2841.3@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:49:37PM -0400, Adam Weinberger wrote: > But OTOH, using a REINPLACE saves you from having to regenerate patches > for every single update. It might make initial patching a bit trickier, > but it can prevent unexpected problem from popping up in the future. > > In my eyes, saying that people shouldn't use pre-patch instead of patch > files to prevent difficult sequential patching is akin to saying that > people shouldn't own cars because they might slam their fingers in the > door ::P Patches for ports which replace anything but FreeBSD specific things (and then paths are the only things I can think about) should be fed upstream and removed in the next upgrade. Just doing blind drive-by replacements for things which went wrong in the past is not quality. And with this I stop argueing about it. I gave good reasons in the first reply. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://weblog.barnet.com.au/edwin/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051011040956.GC1239>