Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2013 20:16:42 +0000 From: Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.org> To: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> Cc: "office@freebsd.org" <office@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Bumping libreoffice Message-ID: <CADLo839%2BtGgk_1N8c_vmVT3%2BOdRP8XmTey33-A9CQ7qMoV9XzA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51155A52.2080003@bsdforen.de> References: <511548F2.4030303@bsdforen.de> <CADLo838ZVzg%2BJ86j%2BF-40sA_88o4cxECw3R0pUtUzX6ikXkWpQ@mail.gmail.com> <51155A52.2080003@bsdforen.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8 February 2013 20:04, Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> wrote: > On 08/02/2013 20:08, Chris Rees wrote: >> On 8 February 2013 18:50, Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> wrote: >>> Please take note of Porters' Handbook section 5.2.2.1. >>> >>> Build fixes are NOT a reason to bump portrevision! >> >> Bash completion was also added, so the package did actually change :) > > I just have to cite the Porters' Handbook here: >> A rule of thumb is to ask yourself whether a change committed to a >> port is something which everyone would benefit from having (either >> because of an enhancement, fix, or by virtue that the new package >> will actually work at all), and weigh that against that fact that >> it will cause everyone who regularly updates their ports tree to be >> compelled to update. If yes, the PORTREVISION should be bumped. > > I don't know who wrote this, but I feel like printing it, putting > it into a frame and mounting it above my desk. Who ever you are, > you are a poet, a true master of the craft. Your words fill my mind > with beauty and serenity! > > > On 08/02/2013 20:08, Chris Rees wrote: >> Obviously you're annoyed at having to rebuild, and I understand that, > > It's more like an itch that I finally scratched, because it's hardly > the first time that happened. > >> but standard practice is to bump whenever the resultant package >> changes, which in this case it did- up to date packages should be >> built on the package building machines. > > I had an elaborate piece on the extremely frequent and extensive > command line interaction of the average bash user with libreoffice > in this place. But I thought I can as well leave that to your > imagination. :D > >> Whether or not the change was *really* worth it is neither here nor >> there, but I might recommend that you do what I do and simply hold >> libreoffice (along with other monster ports) and update it manually. > > I kinda feel obliged to keep those up to date: > http://wiki.bsdforen.de/anwendungen/libreoffice_aus_inoffiziellen_paketen Wow, I've been on the lookout for libreoffice packages for ages-- had you publicised these before?? Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADLo839%2BtGgk_1N8c_vmVT3%2BOdRP8XmTey33-A9CQ7qMoV9XzA>