From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Fri Jun 9 08:02:07 2017 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 3B24CBEE90C for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2017 08:02:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com (mail-wm0-f68.google.com [74.125.82.68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C791882BBE for ; Fri, 9 Jun 2017 08:02:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from r@robakdesign.com) Received: by mail-wm0-f68.google.com with SMTP id 70so10539393wme.1 for ; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 01:02:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=Rbw+2bAozT9l/GPyqpqckdWHViKGxw9KsUtJz1b6Abg=; b=jhlMsKau0zfFh06s6/TuCH5oQ9SAnbHVEFGd1XwZaCAe/bMnBsR4yXkyPvKmrD+c7V ncZZXr81+paJljMaJQkQ5apoFUchxmWML4UnB5P2xFE6FvZq/Z1AbcgKNWPBlvKOWEQd 4n91HWWSyhd6lAsrGWYy7txOVCxcrwN0EiO35HgOT5kfzlLQ6Uw93HwaMKTNhGJ2Q6Fn qO5V87QMcntZfLYL9BxA1G5scXZQ49GKnpVourbT2aw7SmadoKLkb18ZkDdz/RlRiWQQ M+iUbm5D8N0uL88jFvL4ogmluLDL7Masc7SqJdwCmwOUKoYfTfjOA5mVfgRRm65BLQia MWfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCWddjTVMI9kYdTtZeESRKuLIfR9Qa95lgiSLMxPwIEqWug6WAJ 6T4ea6SP3It8ZXxK X-Received: by 10.28.54.154 with SMTP id y26mr6606780wmh.53.1496995318959; Fri, 09 Jun 2017 01:01:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.62] (host86-169-146-243.range86-169.btcentralplus.com. [86.169.146.243]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 97sm545003wrc.5.2017.06.09.01.01.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Jun 2017 01:01:57 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\)) Subject: Re: svn commit: r442588 - in head/www: nginx nginx-full From: Bartek Rutkowski In-Reply-To: <20170608212156.GD55217@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 09:01:57 +0100 Cc: Adam Weinberger , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201706042038.v54KcQMf001482@repo.freebsd.org> <20170605001807.GA55217@FreeBSD.org> <99D58682-8825-417C-81F8-EDC541D31713@FreeBSD.org> <20170607220614.GB55217@FreeBSD.org> <20170608212156.GD55217@FreeBSD.org> To: "Sergey A. Osokin" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 08:02:07 -0000 > On 8 Jun 2017, at 22:21, Sergey A. Osokin wrote: >=20 > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 08:24:24AM +0100, Bartek Rutkowski wrote: >>=20 >>> On 7 Jun 2017, at 23:06, Sergey A. Osokin wrote: >>>=20 >>> On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 02:32:17PM +0100, Bartek Rutkowski wrote: >>>>> On 5 Jun 2017, at 01:18, Sergey A. Osokin wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Hi Bartek and Adam, >>>>>=20 >>>>> I don't think I can get this, so two questions for you guys: >>>>> o) what was the reason to bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx? >>>>> o) wouldn't it btter to just bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx-full? >>>>=20 >>>> Hi Sergey, >>>>=20 >>>> Let me explain it quickly: some time ago you've removed two = external modules from www/nginx port, which is a master for = www/nginx-full. The www/nginx-full had them in default options, what = caused port/pkg build failures and to fix these I needed to remove these = two no longer existing modules from default options. After doing so, = since it *does* change the contents of the package, I needed to bump the = PORTREVISION of www/nginx-full and there were few ways of doing so, but = none of them was easy/simple as they were creating even complex = scenarios in future bumps/updates, so, after consulting possible = solutions with portmgr members, I've chosen one, that while not ideal, = have solved the issue for now without creating other issues in future, = that is to bump the master www/nginx revision. >>>>=20 >>>> Hope that helps. >>>=20 >>> Hi Bartek, >>>=20 >>> Please don't bump PORTREVISION on www/nginx when you need to do so >>> in www/nginx-full. >>=20 >> Sergey, >>=20 >> I tried to explain you why it was necessary - it wasn't my 'oh, I = just want to bump some ports revisions' spree. It was discussed with = portmgr members and approved with adamw@. This is how master/slave = relationship works in our ports and there was no other better way around = it. Hope you'll understand that and accept it in future, where similar = action would be required. >=20 > Bartek, >=20 > Explanations are wrong. Again, I see no reason to bump revision in = www/nginx because > it was possible to bump it in www/nginx-full. >=20 > If you guys ready to support www/nginx without my hamble opinion, = please let me know, > I'll pass the maintainership of it to you immediately. Sergey, You are simply wrong here. Bumping www/nginx revision was in fact = necessary and to avoid a situation like this, I've talked to portmgr = members before doing so, to get their insight and it was confirmed, that = this was the right thing to do. The rules for when revision bumps are quired are clearly outlined in the = Porters Handbook, and the rules for when port may be changed without = prior approval from its maintainer are there as well. You need to = understand that and accept it - we are the team working on Ports Tree = together, and maintainers are not port owners, they are 'first of the = many guardians' if I may allow myself being a bit poetic. Understanding = and accepting these facts will help us all cooperating better, and I = (and I am sure I speak for the many) am very grateful for all the hard = work you're putting into the ports you maintain - no dramatic actions = like dropping maintainership are necessary. I hope this will close the subject for good, lets get back to work! Kind regards, Bartek Rutkowski=