Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 11:42:31 -0400 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Pietro Cerutti <gahr@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r366841 - head/lang/tcl86/files Message-ID: <08AF6C39-2279-4DD9-B41C-80C4B0A6ACF3@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <540490A4.20409@marino.st> References: <201409010731.s817Vrxf062753@svn.freebsd.org> <20140901074609.GA32100@FreeBSD.org> <65B530D9-4740-4A60-A2F5-40335A520C4E@adamw.org> <54048A3B.4030001@marino.st> <F4702D96-B141-4798-B23E-DE0408117AD7@adamw.org> <540490A4.20409@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 Sep, 2014, at 11:28, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > On 9/1/2014 17:14, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> On 1 Sep, 2014, at 11:01, John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> >>> As I said, the issue has been solved, and the solution is good. >>> Nobody dislikes the new changes internally*, but patch-naming has >>> turned into a impasse. >>=20 >> Can I please request a partial commit of it? Just the stuff that >> makes makepatch only update files that were actually changed, and >> commit headers without timestamps? Seriously, let the naming >> convention piece go for now, it is blocking everything else. >=20 >=20 > This is probably the strategy of those that claim they don't care = about > patch names yet block the change on patch names. Once internal > improvements are made the name changes proposal can effectively = trashed. > You've basically asked to resubmit the proposal without the name = change > because everyone knows part 2 would be blocked on the basis it's not a > good enough reason by itself. Or, taken the other way, you=92re using part 1 as leverage in part 2=92s = bikeshed. >>> * since today, antoine says he thinks -p option on diff is "ugly". >>> it's a highly useful option so now we have yet another hurdle to >>> jump. If not for phabric we could have had this in ports weeks >>> ago, but now are stuck in an impasse (which I suspect was the >>> outcome desired by the people that wanted it reviewed in phabric >>> tbh) >>=20 >> antoine is a perfectionist, and that=92s exactly what portmgr needs = to >> be. >=20 > This is NetBSD territory where 1 voice can silence 100. more than 1 > person thinks it doesn't look ugly and it's useful too. The words are > carefully chosen because "looks ugly" is half the reason of the patch > name change proposal, so if we crush "looks ugly" as an aesthetic > trivial opinion, we become hypocrits. check. I too have PR=92s that died the day antoine said, =93I don=92t like it.=94= Yeah, I wish he=92d follow-up and help me make the patches better, and = it=92s depressing to get a rejection with no offer to help make it = better, but controlling what goes into Mk is the core of his = responsibility. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org http://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?08AF6C39-2279-4DD9-B41C-80C4B0A6ACF3>