Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 11:26:58 +0300 From: Andrey Chernov <ache@freebsd.org> To: marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r402813 - head/misc/astrolog Message-ID: <565EAB52.6010301@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <565E9DFA.6050502@marino.st> References: <201512020629.tB26TbDb060296@repo.freebsd.org> <565E9DFA.6050502@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02.12.2015 10:30, John Marino wrote: > On 12/2/2015 7:29 AM, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: >> Author: ache >> Date: Wed Dec 2 06:29:36 2015 >> New Revision: 402813 >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/402813 >> >> Log: >> Unbreak port, update to the latest version of Swiss Ephemeris >> (It does not require any patching, who mark the port BROKEN >> can easily do it by yourself) > > This is an unfair comment. > The *distfile* changed. That implies a poudriere run. > THe person marking BROKEN often does it in a batch of a several ports > that have starting failing in a bulk run. They aren't looking at *any* > of them and rely on the maintainer or a user that cares to figure out > what happened. > > In this case, it's as much work as you can ask without having to > generate patches, so I don't agree with the second half of the comment > AT ALL. > Well, this procedure makes unmaintained ports (like this one) doomed to die even on slightest change (distfile moving to other site etc). According to commit log I am a user that cares to figure out (and I don't want to be maintainer), but the person who marks is BROKEN is not bothered to investigate. -- http://ache.vniz.net/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?565EAB52.6010301>