From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org  Tue Jun  6 09:39:12 2017
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 8C30FBFB34F;
 Tue,  6 Jun 2017 09:39:12 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:6074::16:84])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org",
 Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BDEE871;
 Tue,  6 Jun 2017 09:39:12 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org)
Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id B4F54121CF; Tue,  6 Jun 2017 09:39:11 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 09:39:11 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org>
Cc: "Sergey A. Osokin" <osa@FreeBSD.org>, Bartek Rutkowski <robak@FreeBSD.org>,
 Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org,
 svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r442588 - in head/www: nginx nginx-full
Message-ID: <20170606093911.GA98412@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201706042038.v54KcQMf001482@repo.freebsd.org>
 <20170605001807.GA55217@FreeBSD.org>
 <C38A2113-0736-4687-91D8-D49722D61E35@adamw.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C38A2113-0736-4687-91D8-D49722D61E35@adamw.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18)
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
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: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 09:39:12 -0000

On Mon, Jun 05, 2017 at 05:50:06PM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> > On 4 Jun, 2017, at 18:18, Sergey A. Osokin <osa@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Bartek and Adam,
> > 
> > I don't think I can get this, so two questions for you guys:
> > o) what was the reason to bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx?
> > o) wouldn't it btter to just bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx-full?
> 
> Hi Sergey,

[ Wrapping very long lines ]

> I'll give Bartek a chance to explain in more detail, but I supported an
> nginx bump because it was less complex for the future.
> 
> If nginx-full got a bump, then it would need to be bumped every time
> nginx got bumped, or nginx would have to be bumped by two and nginx-full's
> PORTREVISION line gets removed, and then the line has to be removed at the
> next nginx update or reset. At the end of the day, bumping nginx was more
> straightforward. It triggers an update for everyone else, but becomes less
> invasive over the long haul.

It seems that everyone bumps port revisions whenever they please these days;
wondering about it just a waste of time.  Just an exampler: r442562, where
it was bumped for pkg-descr change (sic!) in a port that takes considerable
time to build. :-(

./danfe