From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 7 06:18:30 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6423D146; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:18:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 360436BA; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 06:18:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.22] (159.Red-79-148-64.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [79.148.64.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A5543BDD; Tue, 7 Apr 2015 01:18:24 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <552376AD.7010903@marino.st> Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 08:18:21 +0200 From: John Marino Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dokuchaev , Adam Weinberger Subject: Re: svn commit: r383472 - head/audio/muse References: <201504061859.t36IxK0v000969@svn.freebsd.org> <20150407012902.GA22994@FreeBSD.org> <91AB85D3-A8DE-491C-A2D7-4E8D7E1CDC12@adamw.org> <20150407023204.GA44784@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20150407023204.GA44784@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh , svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2015 06:18:30 -0000 On 4/7/2015 04:32, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 08:07:33PM -0600, Adam Weinberger wrote: >> ${PORTDOCS:S,^,${WRKSRC}/,} > > This construct is known well enough (and used throughout the tree often > enough) to be immediately recognizable and understood. It is nicely concise > yet still readable: using variable substitution does not make it cryptic, > in this particular case. > >> is not readable. Especially not compared to the pseudo-English statement >> into which sunpoet expanded it: >> >> cd ${WRKSRC} && ${INSTALL_DATA} ${PORTDOCS} Frankly I also prefer the new version. Just because experts can read it and understand it doesn't make it better. > >> You're not getting much attention when you are choosing a different thing >> to care about each day. Pick just one or two topics that are most >> important to you, and work to get those behaviors fixed. > > What if everything is important? Frankly, I'd like to have a better way to > "get those behaviors fixed" and stop micro-managing, but don't see a viable > alternative to reviewing commits (except, perhaps, improving the PHB, but > that's orthogonal to peer reviews and given how often it is being violated, > it's highly unlikely that it would replace them in a foreseeable future). The main opposition I have is when "svn blame" is given as a reason. I've actually heard to not do change that would be done on a new port simply to avoid making blame harder to read. Sorry, I disagree strongly with this concept. The "right thing" takes precedence over blame, and I define the "right thing" as something a brand new port would have. Secondly, I *rare* use blame; I rarely need it. If I absolutely have to know who did what and what else was done, then I'll just have to bite the bullet and trace it through several commits. Speaking for myself, I really would like not have "this messes up 'svn blame'" given as a reason for not making a (subjective) improvement anymore. I do not care very much about that, and it makes me wonder if people are using blame all the time and if so, why? John