From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Sun Mar 22 11:21:14 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A8227DFB3; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:21:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from hamza.pair.com (hamza.pair.com [209.68.5.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48lZp13ykvz4H9n; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:21:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from hamza.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B164933E37; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:21:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from anthias (unknown [77.118.148.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1C9333E0C; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 07:21:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 12:20:58 +0100 (CET) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Mathieu Arnold cc: John Hixson , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r528808 - head/net/nsq In-Reply-To: <20200322083237.vaqvidavvdu2jrcj@atuin.in.mat.cc> Message-ID: References: <202003202245.02KMjo5Z005946@repo.freebsd.org> <20200321172227.zn7i4ov6vkvtboii@aching.in.mat.cc> <20200322083237.vaqvidavvdu2jrcj@atuin.in.mat.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48lZp13ykvz4H9n X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of gerald@pfeifer.com designates 209.68.5.143 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gerald@pfeifer.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.46 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.99)[-0.995,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:hamza.pair.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[pfeifer.com]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.992,0]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; IP_SCORE(-2.17)[ip: (-7.26), ipnet: 209.68.0.0/18(-2.30), asn: 7859(-1.26), country: US(-0.05)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7859, ipnet:209.68.0.0/18, country:US]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:21:14 -0000 Hi Mat, On Sun, 22 Mar 2020, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>>> +PORTREVISION= 2 >>> Why bump PORTREVISION? >> John, as a bit more color: when a commit solely allows a port to build >> that failed to build before, or build where it did not build before (OS >> version, architecture,...) we don't usually bump PORTREVISION. > I do not understand what is so hard with understanding why PORTREVISION > exists. was this directed at me, or a general note? If the former, yes, I could (should) have omitted the word "usually" since I had "solely" at the beginning of the sentence. Apart from that softness, I don't sense disagreement; is there? Gerald