From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 29 11:43:23 2013
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id 572707A5; Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:43:23 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:43:23 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ganael LAPLANCHE <martymac@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r315536 - in head/games/blobby: . files
Message-ID: <20130329114323.GA47948@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201303291022.r2TAMhKY044686@svn.freebsd.org>
 <20130329104052.GA33138@FreeBSD.org>
 <20130329112201.M58847@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130329112201.M58847@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org,
 ports-committers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head
 <svn-ports-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:43:23 -0000

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:33:15AM +0000, Ganael LAPLANCHE wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 10:40:52 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote
> > > -PORTVERSION=	1.0r1
> > > +PORTVERSION=	1.0r3
> > 
> > It would be nice to use DISTVERSION one day (when would be 
> > possible without reordering pacakge version).
> > [...]
> 
> Thanks for the hint! Unfortunately, as you say, with the following patch
> [...] PORTVERSION would become 1.0.r3, which is < 1.0r3, so I would need
> to bump PORTEPOCH to switch to this new naming scheme.  Not sure it is
> better than using the current DISTNAME+WRKSRC combo :/

If course bumping PORTEPOCH is not better.  Hence, we need to wait for 1.1x
or something to make the switch.  Right not it's OK leave it as it is.

./danfe