Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:46:10 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, eadler@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r302285 - in head: audio/gmpc-mserver multimedia/xbmc Message-ID: <502297D2.8070305@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <50226EC7.7090400@FreeBSD.org> References: <201208081246.q78CkMJf084866@svn.freebsd.org> <50226EC7.7090400@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/08/2012 06:51 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 8/8/2012 7:46 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> Author: bdrewery >> Date: Wed Aug 8 12:46:21 2012 >> New Revision: 302285 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/302285 >> >> Log: >> Chase www/libmicrohttpd shlib version bump >> >> Approved by: eadler (mentor) >> >> Modified: >> head/audio/gmpc-mserver/Makefile >> head/multimedia/xbmc/Makefile >> > > We may have done this wrong in terms of MFCing 1 commit to another > branch, but our thinking was around reverts. If we reverted the > libmicrohttpd update, we wouldn't want to revert the revision bumps. But > if we did revert, we would need to bump the revisions again to downgrade > their dependencies. > > So I'm not sure what the best thing here is now with SVN. > > Anyone else have thoughts? Short answer: Always do related changes together in the same commit. Longer answer: In a theoretical future where we would need to merge from head into a stable ports branch you wouldn't do the merge until you were confident that the changes were correct. So worst case scenario you'd first merge the initial big change, then merge any followup fixes, then commit it all together. If for whatever reason you had to revert the update to the libmicrohttpd port in head you can do a partial revert of the larger commit. hth, Doug
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?502297D2.8070305>