Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 11:02:48 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: Yen-Ming Lee <leeym@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/chinese/tin Makefile ports/chinese/tin/files patch-attrib.c patch-cook.c patch-init.c patch-mail.c patch-tin.defaults patch-tin_defaults Message-ID: <20120104110248.GA3811@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20120104033137.GB3565@magic.hamla.org> References: <201201021534.q02FYLba029039@repoman.freebsd.org> <20120103155438.GA70361@FreeBSD.org> <20120104033137.GB3565@magic.hamla.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 10:31:37PM -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote: > On Tue, 2012-01-03 at 15:54:38 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > ... > > > Revision Changes Path > > > 1.1 +11 -0 ports/chinese/tin/files/patch-tin.defaults (new) > > > 1.2 +0 -11 ports/chinese/tin/files/patch-tin_defaults (dead) > > > > This renaming of the patch file just because someone thought that dot > > looks better than underscore is gratuitous and should not have been > > done. (Not to mention that things that this patch tries to accomplish > > are usually done with one simple REINPLACE_CMD line.) > > I suspect the motivation for the change was to canonicalize the filename > as described in the PH. I understand the motivation; for newly created files, PH rules obviously should be followed. For already existing patches, esp. when their contents stays the same, such blunt renames only cause unnecessary stress on the repo and taint the history. Ergo, should be avoided. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120104110248.GA3811>