From owner-svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 27 13:12:12 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81019C6; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:12:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ie0-f182.google.com (mail-ie0-f182.google.com [209.85.223.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F6908FC08; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:12:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id s9so14773522iec.13 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 05:12:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=BNl2KXrtKHnjobYT+ysfDCedAkX3CLRTHss9llD2Vdg=; b=Wcjf/a3v5zq22U25V/Cf/mJ1KTkVvoaf28CUauFToaGfho2/6RSQ1nD7kQpx2oQa0d pBcJxRG9OpVRqEkvma63/M3uWzobY0Eav8oCvDjmtTCtRCJNbknGDosIPgbgnreo2LOH IGzLw35lRKcOvYG/LMHpWALJi3cC9cqC2El7rDGid4Nlhyjk2g2dsz3XmLSnMy/TrhMR T5tNfiDs6YVjiHR3xOJgeqOQE1qTvWcu3u2FnK8ZbowwddQJ48UybCwuTZH5iX8qAAGY l2/UA8C4cS2DSYYmHn8nj2xL0n4ZwhqtlfbzQz3fCqoMQv76hYCbXCJL8MS2YX2joG1I cIcA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.106.227 with SMTP id gx3mr18276383igb.10.1354021930924; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 05:12:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.50.88.137 with HTTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 05:12:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20121127124512.GJ53110@gahrfit.gahr.ch> References: <201211271108.qARB8u5F050244@svn.freebsd.org> <20121127124512.GJ53110@gahrfit.gahr.ch> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 08:12:10 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r307833 - head/x11-toolkits/fox16 From: "b. f." To: gahr@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: bf1783@gmail.com List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:12:12 -0000 On 11/27/12, Pietro Cerutti wrote: > On 2012-Nov-27, 07:37, b. f. wrote: >> On 11/27/12, Pietro Cerutti wrote: >> > Author: gahr >> > Date: Tue Nov 27 11:08:55 2012 >> > New Revision: 307833 >> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/307833 >> > >> > Log: >> > - Update to 1.6.47 >> > * Prototype of wndproc() was not correct for 64-bit Windows. >> > - Remove shlib versions from LIB_DEPENDS >> > >> > Feature safe: yes >> >> I'm confused: we have changes like this that clearly aren't feature >> safe going into the tree without explicit permission from portmgr, and >> Ken stating that the release was moving forward with only a limited >> set of packages. So is the ports tree still frozen, or not? > > Well I didn't see it as a sweeping change, since only a handful of ports > were changed. I guess personal judgment is needed to sort out > > "A sweeping change is a commit that would affect a non-trivial number of > packages" > > from > > "shared library version bumps" (which are said to qualify as sweep > commits) > > In this case, only a few (and small) ports were affected, which is why I > went forward. Could we have a clear and explicit statement from portmgr about what is permitted? I don't mean to pick on Pietro: this question keeps coming up. A number of us have been using the rule of thumb that any non-cosmetic change that affects more than one default package isn't possible without permission. If there is a lesser standard, or if the tree should be considered frozen only for a subset of packages that will be on the release media, then I can start making a few changes that some users have requested. b.