Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 4 Jan 2012 11:35:06 -0500
From:      Sahil Tandon <sahil@tandon.net>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        "cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org" <cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org>, Yen-Ming Lee <leeym@FreeBSD.org>, "cvs-all@FreeBSD.org" <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org>, "ports-committers@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:  <FB6E3805-E666-4E6C-97FC-54CD94ECADE7@tandon.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120104110248.GA3811@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201201021534.q02FYLba029039@repoman.freebsd.org> <20120103155438.GA70361@FreeBSD.org> <20120104033137.GB3565@magic.hamla.org> <20120104110248.GA3811@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:02 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> 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)=

>>>=20
>>> 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.)
>>=20
>> I suspect the motivation for the change was to canonicalize the filename
>> as described in the PH.
>=20
> I understand the motivation; for newly created files, PH rules obviously
> should be followed.  For already existing patches, esp. when their content=
s
> stays the same, such blunt renames only cause unnecessary stress on the re=
po
> and taint the history.  Ergo, should be avoided.

Sigh, please spare me the same old lecture; your logic is simple and no one i=
s questioning that repo churn should be avoided. In your original mail you m=
ade reference to someone who thought one character "looking better" than ano=
ther was perhaps the motivation for the name change. I pointed out a more li=
kely rationale and ultimately agreed that such things are anyway best handle=
d in Makefile rather than standalone patches.  I also used an emoticon to co=
nvey that I was simply guessing the likely motivation for name change and no=
t in some way defending it; however, you explicitly removed that and other r=
elevant parts of my reply in your quoting above.

Over and out,
Sahil=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FB6E3805-E666-4E6C-97FC-54CD94ECADE7>