From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Tue Jan 9 19:00:22 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB7AE6AA2D; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:00:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from osa@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 375A16AF30; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:00:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from osa@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 975) id 845A7146C2; Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 19:00:21 +0000 From: "Sergey A. Osokin" To: Adam Weinberger Cc: Mathieu Arnold , v@fatpipi.com, Jochen Neumeister , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r458000 - head/www/nginx Message-ID: <20180109190021.GC9882@FreeBSD.org> References: <201801031933.w03JXLGa033758@repo.freebsd.org> <20180106134130.GA39725@FreeBSD.org> <20180106182537.GA78102@FreeBSD.org> <20180109123546.GA9882@FreeBSD.org> <825D5BD5-38D0-4F96-AEEE-2FA483F9D2BC@adamw.org> <20180109183323.GB9882@FreeBSD.org> <5ACC5441-B3B1-41CB-8E95-5D430BDF84E1@adamw.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5ACC5441-B3B1-41CB-8E95-5D430BDF84E1@adamw.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 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, 09 Jan 2018 19:00:22 -0000 On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:49:11AM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote: > > On 9 Jan, 2018, at 11:33, Sergey A. Osokin wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 11:03:35AM -0700, Adam Weinberger wrote: > >>> On 9 Jan, 2018, at 5:35, Sergey A. Osokin wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> is there any update? > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >> > >> Hi Sergey, > >> > >> Sorry, but I can't give you a good answer on why the change was or wasn't > >> discussed, and why people were or weren't notified about it in advance. It > >> was policy long before it was written into the PHB, and that occurred in > >> r43772, 3 years 11 months ago. > >> > >> At the end of the day, it's simply the only mechanism we have to ensure > >> that users' installations match what we have in the repo. Past that I'm > >> not > >> really sure how to give you a satisfactory answer your question. If the > >> policy were enacted a few months ago, I could provide insight, but we're > >> talking about something that's been policy for 5+ years. > > > > Adam, > > > > thanks for the update. > > > > Since this new policy never been discussed, we had no public plans to > > enact this policy in our roadmap, the developers have never been notified > > about this major change, I'd recommend to postpone it and start new > > discussion. > > Personally I don't see big value of it, also I think this new policy > > potentially can bring more harmful than positive effects for the project. > > Come on, Sergey. We cannot postpone something that's been active policy for > OVER FIVE YEARS. So we didn't here about that for so long period of time? :-) Could please explain this. > Users need to rebuild a port when it changes. It doesn't matter which set > of options they're using, they must rebuild it. If you'd like to have a > discussion about changing the policy, then that's great and we should have > that discussion. But in the meantime, you MUST follow the policy. Fortunately I'm not on a position to follow an dictate like this, so I'm going to avoid to use this policy as I did for all of those years. -- Sergey Osokin