Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:40:36 -0400 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Instafix for FreeBSD ports brokenness on 10.0? Message-ID: <CAF6rxgmvEJsNoWJVEqJm5PKzg199_jRHyWYb=tk5zMatuTELtw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20110929134626.8c019ef1.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <20110929084725.GN91943@hoeg.nl> <20110929094733.GS5495@droso.net> <20110929134626.8c019ef1.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The ports tree can be very fickle and touching a large class of ports requires multiple exp-runs. Attempting these types of changes just prior to release adds a degree of risk which no one wants to accept. > The question is why we're not going to fiddle with auto* given other > stuff which is being committed to the ports tree right now, which is > unrelated to release as well? Because these commits don't possibly break a large portion of ports. > The fix can be added unconditionaly, > thus having a very low (I'd say negligible) risk of breaking anything. Affecting *every single port* is not a negligible risk. > In the meantime, if we don't fix this we're making it impossible for > any HEAD users to do any kind of productive work in ports. We will fix it, once 9-RELEASE is out the door. In the meantime please see UPDATING 20110928. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgmvEJsNoWJVEqJm5PKzg199_jRHyWYb=tk5zMatuTELtw>