From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 14 05:48:08 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8826716A4CE; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 05:48:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from toxic.magnesium.net (toxic.magnesium.net [207.154.84.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51CBA43D4C; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 05:48:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from adamw@magnesium.net) Received: by toxic.magnesium.net (Postfix, from userid 1252) id 29784DA83C; Sun, 13 Mar 2005 21:48:08 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 00:48:08 -0500 From: Adam Weinberger To: Mikhail Teterin Message-ID: <20050314054808.GB36011@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <200503140513.j2E5DKSk061264@corbulon.video-collage.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200503140513.j2E5DKSk061264@corbulon.video-collage.com> X-Editor: Vim 6.3 http://www.vim.org X-Mailer: Mutt 1.5 http://www.mutt.org X-PGP-Key: http://www.vectors.cx/pgp.key.txt X-URL: http://www.vectors.cx X-ASL: 6/m/behind you User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: gnome@freebsd.org cc: openoffice@freebsd.org Subject: Re: intrusive PORTREVISION bumping X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 05:48:08 -0000 >> (03.14.2005 @ 0013 PST): Mikhail Teterin said, in 1.1K: << > > On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:43:31 -0500 (EST), Mikhail Teterin > > wrote: > > > > > Why was the PORTREVISION of editors/ooodict-all bumped on Saturday? > > > According to the log message, it was to "chase the glib20 version". > > > > > > The port installs nothing but data and does not even build anything. > > > > > > I understand, that keeping track of such things complicates gnome's > > > upgrade commits, but such gratuitous bumping is going to result in > > > plenty of automatic reinstalls around the world _for no good reason > > > whatsoever_... > > > > > > Can it, please, be avoided in the future? Thanks! > > > > Yes, if you keep your eyes open. > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-openoffice/2005-March/001377.html > > You must think, I'm on the openoffice@ list. I'm not. I'm just a user of > their port(s)... > > I don't think, they ought to be responsible either -- Gnome@'s method of > determining the dependencies is flawed... Yours, > > -mi >> end of "Re: intrusive PORTREVISION bumping" from Mikhail Teterin << We sent a message to all owners of all ports that depended on glib20. We asked them to tell us any ports that we shouldn't bump PORTREVISION on. Per usual, they ignored the question entirely. There were hundreds -- if not thousands -- of ports which needed a PORTREVISION bump. A good-sized handful of those ports which were bumped did NOT end up needing one. However, there is simply no way for the FreeBSD GNOME team to figure out that list. We relied upon maintainers to tell us what the deal was with their ports. We really can't make judgement calls about other peoples' ports. We can only say, "People will have to rebuild the app and will be ensured that there will be no library problems. And if it's not necessary, the maintainer will tell us so." Complaining to us won't help, because we will be following the exact same procedure for the next release. Your best bet would be to try to convince the openoffice team to read emails and PRs from time to time. That being said, if you can think of a better deployment plan for new glib20 library versions, please let us know! # Adam -- Adam Weinberger adamw@magnesium.net || adamw@FreeBSD.org adamw@vectors.cx || adamw@gnome.org http://www.vectors.cx