From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 26 19:55:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-python@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FDBA192; Mon, 26 May 2014 19:55:36 +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 56E2D259A; Mon, 26 May 2014 19:55:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1F843B4A; Mon, 26 May 2014 14:55:15 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <53839C13.4040405@marino.st> Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 21:54:59 +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: =?UTF-8?B?QmFydMWCb21pZWogUnV0a293c2tp?= , marino@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/189666: devel/py-demjson: unfetchable due to rerolled tarball References: <201405260846.s4Q8kUdC079970@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: ports@robakdesign.com, freebsd-python@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 19:55:36 -0000 On 5/26/2014 21:36, Bartłomiej Rutkowski wrote: > I've just mailed the upstream, explaining the situation and > suggesting releasing such changes as minor version numbers, like > 2.0.1 or something similar. We'll see what, if any response will I > receive, but for now, please, patch the port with new distinfo you've > proposed. If this happens again and we wont get any answer by that > time, we'll consider hosting the distfiles or removing the port. Hi Bartek, The issue is that I can't blindly update the distinfo. Somebody (almost always the maintainer) has to "diff" the original version and the new version and evaluate exactly what changed and if it's malicious. I already got chewed out last week for not verifying this personally, but I generally trust the maintainer if he/she said he did this. Have you actually looked inside the new tarball? Thanks, John