From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Wed Feb 3 09:18:18 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B95A76F06 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 09:18:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E25C5194B for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 09:18:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u139II1Z022285 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2016 09:18:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 205852] Be nicer about multiple sqlalchemy ports Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 09:18:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Ports Framework X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: needs-qa, patch X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: girgen@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: portmgr@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2016 09:18:19 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D205852 --- Comment #18 from Palle Girgensohn --- (In reply to Kubilay Kocak from comment #17) Of course, you're right. The API changes need attention from each and every maintainer. But 0.7 is really their oldest release still supported. For me,= I need 1.0 for my port...=20 So the preferred way would be, as already stated before:=20 sqlalchemy07 sqlalchemy08 sqlalchemy09 sqlalchemy (1.0) right? This PR original question is about allowing a port, that is agnostic to the= se API changes, to use any of the above sqlalchemy ports if it is already installed (as a dependecny of a more picky port). Suggestions using globs or regex, or simply depend on a file, will all break package dependencies. I d= on't think that is a very good idea, but maybe I'm being overly conservative her= e? PR#191442 discusses actually updating sqlalchemy. Maybe that PR is more to = the point from my perspective. Anyway, all I wany is a sqlalchemy-1.0 port that I can depend upon. My pyth= on knowledge is very shallow, and hence my interest here lies not with python packages as such. But I'm glad to help if we can get this sqlalchemy bit cleaned up a bit. :) Just tell me what I can do. I have a poudriere setup f= or example, but I guess most of you do. :-) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=