From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan  4 17:15:28 2012
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 091C61065672; Wed,  4 Jan 2012 17:15:28 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:15:28 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Sahil Tandon <sahil@tandon.net>
Message-ID: <20120104171527.GA64092@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201201021534.q02FYLba029039@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20120103155438.GA70361@FreeBSD.org>
	<20120104033137.GB3565@magic.hamla.org>
	<20120104110248.GA3811@FreeBSD.org>
	<FB6E3805-E666-4E6C-97FC-54CD94ECADE7@tandon.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <FB6E3805-E666-4E6C-97FC-54CD94ECADE7@tandon.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
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
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:15:28 -0000

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 11:35:06AM -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2012, at 6:02 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Sigh, please spare me the same old lecture; your logic is simple and no
> one is questioning that repo churn should be avoided. [...]

Sahil, I am by no means are lecturing you (or anyone else personally, FWIW).
After all, you're not the one who had made the commit in question.  :-)
I merely tried to put those final dots and umlauts over i's, that's all, in
hope that it would clear all remaining questions for less experienced folks
who might be reading the list, not you.

> I also used an emoticon to convey that I was simply guessing the likely
> motivation for name change and not in some way defending it; however, you
> explicitly removed that and other relevant parts of my reply in your
> quoting above.

I've read your email in its entirety; the only reason why I did not quote
that parts is that I had nothing to add or to argue there.

Peace,

./danfe