Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:55:53 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: olli hauer <ohauer@gmx.de> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org>, Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r365003 - head/devel/elfsh/files Message-ID: <20140817155553.GA94237@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <53F0CCAB.1030706@gmx.de> References: <201408151704.s7FH4f4W071527@svn.freebsd.org> <20140816164551.GA86642@FreeBSD.org> <53EF9469.3070704@gmx.de> <20140817091822.GA51054@FreeBSD.org> <7012BDCA-0949-4A7F-A017-D8F76476F8B9@adamw.org> <53F0C0BC.2000902@marino.st> <53F0C6AB.8070309@gmx.de> <20140817152003.GA83527@FreeBSD.org> <53F0CCAB.1030706@gmx.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 05:39:23PM +0200, olli hauer wrote: > If we go the new patch route then the patch separator should be specified > and read from the the $port/Makefile. > > Say you prefer as separator a singel '+' to shape patches, after some time > another porter or a simple user trying to create a patch using '_' as > default then it will end in a mess. Yes; and sane porter with notice it, and regenerate the patches with correct (currently used) separator. If they nonetheless submit a PR with gratuitous 'svn mv' then sane committer will block it (or better renames the patches as needed). However, what you're talking about is special cases; 90% of people will just run "make makepath" and be done with it, period. Eventually, the whole tree will come to a more or less consistent state, and 99% of us would be happy. > Until now it was always clear with makepatch, the main issue was even devs > answering often it is documented have overseen the passage ... > > I've looked over the patch in Phabricator but haven't seen any technical > improvement except it renders for some devs a more pretty patch name. Look. It all started because some of us care about patch names. We'be been told "who cares about this shit". Now, if they don't care but we are, we've just created a patch that makes us happy, and does not upset them because as they've said, they don't care. We also do care about timestamps, so we have fixed them as well. We tried hard to avoid mass patch ranames, we did not remove any support for existing legal path separators. Me and John are currently running this code and it works as intended, without causing any massive stress. Not every change is about just technical improvements. I care for aesthetic side of things as well. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140817155553.GA94237>