Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 20:41:35 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@gmail.com>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/graphics/gmt Makefile Message-ID: <20120217204135.GA47274@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CADLo83-yh9tCV2oSKgcTErEnLqMM-u_Ga5YJFTL1JzCaqJsPFw@mail.gmail.com> References: <201202171152.q1HBq3vV020660@repoman.freebsd.org> <4F3E843B.3000309@p6m7g8.com> <CADLo83-yh9tCV2oSKgcTErEnLqMM-u_Ga5YJFTL1JzCaqJsPFw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 05:01:25PM +0000, Chris Rees wrote: > On 17 February 2012 16:45, Philip M. Gollucci <pgollucci@gmail.com> wrote: > > No need to set bump PORTREVISION here. > > I did that here because then anyone updating all ports will be alerted > to its BROKEN and DEPRECATED state. If someone has it installed (with whatever local patching it required), she would probably get sad with port revision bump, since it would require to explicitly hold the package in pkgtools.conf from now on. I agree with Philip here: port revision should be bumped if something is definitely wrong with installed packages users might have. Bumping port revision for (officially) broken ports is bogus. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120217204135.GA47274>