From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org  Sat Sep 19 07:42:41 2015
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@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 7375EA03662;
 Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:42:41 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 641AC1D0D;
 Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:42:41 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id 62CE81912; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:42:41 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:42:41 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: marino@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: <20150919074241.GA96797@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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55FD0FA4.7050306@marino.st>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head
 <svn-ports-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-head>, 
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:42:41 -0000

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 09:32:52AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
> On 9/19/2015 9:20 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 09:05:52AM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> >> +--On 19 septembre 2015 01:20:59 +0200 "Timur I. Bakeyev"
> >> <timur@com.bat.ru> wrote:
> >> | Was it really neessary to bump port revision for the change
> >>
> >> I'll cut at that.  Yes, it was, the resulting package changed, so, yes,
> >> bumping PORTREVISION is mandatory.
> > 
> > Oh please Mathieu, not this "read PHB, no thinking required" bullcrap
> > again.  Apparently you don't realize how much of PITA these bumps for
> > no real reason can be.  Port revision should be bumped if there was
> > something *wrong* with the previous package, or rebuild is *really*
> > necessary due to breaking change in its dependencies.
> 
> -1.
> I want clear and umabiguous rules.  I don't want people using their
> judgement because sometimes that judgement is way in left field (but
> they are convinced everyone else is stupid).

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?

./danfe