Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 04:13:00 +0800 From: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@freebsd.org> To: Joseph Mingrone <jrm@freebsd.org> Cc: Matthias Fechner <idefix@fechner.net>, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>, Torsten Zuehlsdorff <freebsd@toco-domains.de>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r467193 - in head/www/gitlab: . files Message-ID: <CAMHz58S8H%2BV7cPY90-vZX94iS7JwRWpk0bSFbLncagfdpUxKnw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86o9inrzzk.fsf@phe.ftfl.ca> References: <201804121833.w3CIXtgW077267@repo.freebsd.org> <e1a55c7b-1ad1-36c8-ec3d-f806702feed5@fechner.net> <CAMHz58RD9rtyqBLV6nsZ2naOvGRiO7PDPAGWZ8Vemnz-g1J6cw@mail.gmail.com> <431aaec9-51c2-c0c9-7a1f-2f29f79edb5d@fechner.net> <20180413100736.GA32041@FreeBSD.org> <b14f8ea5-5d26-6ea0-c175-558a8fef2504@toco-domains.de> <86o9inrzzk.fsf@phe.ftfl.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:35 PM, Joseph Mingrone <jrm@freebsd.org> wrote: > Matthias Fechner <idefix@fechner.net> writes: > > Dear sunpoet, > > > Am 12.04.2018 um 20:33 schrieb Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh: > >> Log: > >> Fix Gemfile for rubygem-default_value_for 3.1.0 update > > >> - Bump PORTREVISION for package change > > >> Modified: > >> head/www/gitlab/Makefile > >> head/www/gitlab/files/patch-Gemfile > > I really enjoy your work and it is totally fine for me, if you upgrade = a > > gem that you copy the old one and make sure that gitlab uses the old. > > (like you did with r467106, thanks a lot for this!) > > > But please do not start to patch the Gemfile! > > This will break gitlab. Have you tested gitlab with this modification? > > (for sure not, I reported exactly that version of default_value_for > > upstream and they rolled back the change as it broke gitlab, they broke > > 3.0.4 and rolled back the modification with 3.0.5, now you changed > > gitlab to use the version that for sure will not work!) > > > Please revert this modification and ask me (the maintainer) before you > > start to modify the port I maintain. > > Thanks a lot that you understand this. > > > Gru=C3=9F > > Matthias > > I relate. Sunpoet, I also appreciate your work, but this type of > breakage can be frustrating. We need to figure out a solution. > Hi, As I replied before, I'll keep the Gemfile unchanged. The rubygem ports will follow the version requirement in Gemfile. In fact, I stored the Gemfiles of gitlab, mastodon and vagrant in a specific directory. When I update a rubygem port, I check the dependent ports to see if they accepts the newer version. Regards, sunpoet > > On 13.04.2018 12:07, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > >> I don't quite understand how/why would anyone in their right mind writ= e > >> software than breaks when one of its dependencies have *minor* version > >> bump? Is this specific to Gitlab, or the nature of Gemfiles is really > >> that broken? > > This practice seems to be more common and in the extreme case, exact > versions of all components are specified. A few examples that come to > mind other than Ruby Gems (with Bundler) are node and Haskell's stack. > > To match what upstream is requesting, I have wondered if the ability to > specify maximum versions would be useful. > > RUN_DEPENDS=3D > rubygem-default_value_for>=3D3.0.1<3.1:devel/rubygem-default_value_for > > The added complexity is probably not worth it for the ability to run > this sort of test. > > devel/rubygem-default_value_for % check_update_breaks_something > *** DANGER, DANGER *** www/gitlab requires devel/rubygem-default_value_fo= r > < 3.1 ! > > A less drastic approach would be to add PORTSCOUT entries to prevent > premature Gem port updates. In this case > > PORTSCOUT=3D limit:^3\.0 > in devel/rubygem-default_value_for/Makefile > Could this work for everyone? > J. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAMHz58S8H%2BV7cPY90-vZX94iS7JwRWpk0bSFbLncagfdpUxKnw>