From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 24 02:15:18 2009
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1547106566B;
	Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:15:18 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: from syn.atarininja.org (syn.csh.rit.edu [129.21.60.158])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880618FC13;
	Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:15:18 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: by syn.atarininja.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 2FFAB5C34; Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:15:18 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:15:18 -0400
From: Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20090324021518.GC1292@atarininja.org>
References: <200903240023.n2O0NVBb013624@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<49C84088.9020505@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <49C84088.9020505@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05)
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net-im/libpurple Makefile
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: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:15:19 -0000

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 07:08:08PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> Wesley Shields wrote:
> > wxs         2009-03-24 00:23:31 UTC
> > 
> >   FreeBSD ports repository
> > 
> >   Modified files:
> >     net-im/libpurple     Makefile 
> >   Log:
> >   - Chase devel/silc-toolkit update.
> >   
> >   Revision  Changes    Path
> >   1.58      +1 -1      ports/net-im/libpurple/Makefile
> > 
> > http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/net-im/libpurple/Makefile.diff?&r1=1.57&r2=1.58&f=h
> 
> Since silc is off by default (and therefore the package won't change),
> was this necessary?

There are two viewpoints to this:

1) The option is off by default so the package won't change, and thus
PORTREVISION doesn't need to be bumped.

2) Not bumping PORTREVISION may cause the port to misbehave if it's
built with old libraries.

I don't know which (if any) is the right answer, but I went with option
#2 in this case.  I'm interested in knowing what the official thing to
do is because I can see both sides of this debate.

-- WXS