Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:42:21 +0200 From: Dejan Lesjak <dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Dejan Lesjak <lesi@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Michael Johnson <ahze@ahze.net>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/astro/gpsdrive pkg-plist ports/audio/gqmpeg-devel pkg-plist ports/databases/pgworksheet pkg-plist ports/deskutils/hot-babe pkg-plist ports/deskutils/xchm pkg-plist ports/editors/abiword-devel pkg-plist ports/games/crimson ... Message-ID: <200506151442.22406.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> In-Reply-To: <20050615141103.lupteudmxccko4ww@netchild.homeip.net> References: <200506150243.j5F2habT053985@repoman.freebsd.org> <200506151352.48180.dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> <20050615141103.lupteudmxccko4ww@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 15 of June 2005 14:11, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Dejan Lesjak <dejan.lesjak@ijs.si> wrote: > > Well, if they are empty, why not? It is actually rather unavoidable. I > > could be missing something, but this is how I understand things: > > Technically we don't need to update the revisions, but our policy (as far > as I understand it) is: if the plist changes, we bump the revision. > > I will not complain if you don't bump the revisions of affected ports (e.g. > when nobody else thinks the ports need a revision bump), I just mentioned > the common practice so far. Sure, and I'm just trying to explain why I think the bump is not needed in this case and hopefully make you agree on this :) Basically I was trying to stick with this part of Porter's Handbook: 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. And I did not think that this change is compelling enough to cause everyone to update this ports. Dejan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506151442.22406.dejan.lesjak>