Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:06:49 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   =?UTF-8?B?W0J1ZyAyODA3NjFdIGRldmVsL29jYW1sLXNlcTogdXBkYXRlIDAu?= =?UTF-8?B?Mi4yIOKGkiAwLjMuMQ==?=
Message-ID:  <bug-280761-7788-staLRoUXgA@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-280761-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-280761-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D280761

--- Comment #2 from =C3=84lven <alster@vinterdalen.se> ---
> I think that a better course will be to drop this package at some point, =
e.g. we > can ship a META file in the lang/ocaml.

I agree with you on this would be better solution for this, still I do see
value in keeping the least possible divergence with upstream in version num=
bers
as we usually try to do with patches.
At least for minimizing mental effort to think, why this or that package
version diverges from the latest from upstream. After all, they never chang=
ed
it since 2022, so not much work expected.

I'm ready to do the work with preparing patch for version bumps myself to n=
ot
to put the effort on you, would you be willing to help it to be accepted in=
 the
tree.
Need some advice on doing so, as never prepared multi-packages version bumps
before.

What would you say?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-280761-7788-staLRoUXgA>