From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Oct 27 15:58:27 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96881A1E92D for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:58:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from koobs.freebsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com (mail-pa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6485A1E42 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:58:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from koobs.freebsd@gmail.com) Received: by pacfv9 with SMTP id fv9so236439134pac.3 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:58:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:reply-to:subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5T+Qh07ePlMnAoqmZqjVw+R7fyfmhmhkuuDwVesfBuI=; b=ma08x1CAn9tAW2JshfdHATB17XFzS4dgc1tM0vJmBSH00CadDk+sC4gKVF7d5a81fi t3Qt8JV4giZEERzuSV3u3KJ9bwz/ueOreIjVcvtXXF4jh3utSSoKRmIdN3xaKVsyJ+G3 Ry3qLRJmLuxme6UO4EBKv1bvW3l+n6XyH3wIctUr76IfxiOzh9JrWbWAfPnHBPwcdTL0 yXpQYOSmlx7QJXZSU4rZ+alPxCDUjVuk/p+v5/ubR7vh6ko3ihfhaYk9YMtjIegvXuAI gWuCqn93B/BBMpil6VO493vIgdV51eaJgijY2NuB7vavAwRqp58O8OnJlEr0ZCOYzgIP NJlw== X-Received: by 10.68.192.104 with SMTP id hf8mr29073254pbc.66.1445961506635; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:58:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (ppp59-167-128-11.static.internode.on.net. [59.167.128.11]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id cs5sm40450592pbc.15.2015.10.27.08.58.23 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Kubilay Kocak Reply-To: koobs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Help needed: ports builds on 10.X but breaks on 9.X References: <20151003090630.GA14086@biertje.skysmurf.nl> <20151025151605.GA13444@biertje.skysmurf.nl> <562CF667.1030007@FreeBSD.org> <20151027144304.GB92455@biertje.skysmurf.nl> To: "A.J. \"Fonz\" van Werven" Cc: FreeBSD ports mailing list From: Kubilay Kocak X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <562F9F1B.3050303@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 02:58:19 +1100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/42.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151027144304.GB92455@biertje.skysmurf.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 15:58:27 -0000 On 28/10/2015 1:43 AM, A.J. "Fonz" van Werven wrote: > Kubilay Kocak wrote: > >> Set merge-quarterly to ? in the bugzilla issue report, and ask (in a >> comment) for the committer who resolved it in ports HEAD to kindly merge >> it :) > > Thanks to you and Kurt Jaeger for the help. The committer in question has > now reassigned it to the security team so I'll wait and see what happens. > > Also thanks for the additional information Koobs. You're welcome :) > This does leave me with one question: just when is it appropriate to set > the merge-quarterly flag? Apparently quarterly fallout is one example and > security fixes are another. But is there anything else? > > AvW > The real question that informs the decision is: Might/Do the people using the quarterly want/need this? Officially it's: Very well-tested build/run/security issues/fixes. Another way to look at it is: Not version updates (all else being equal). A really way to get a better feel is to browse the quarterly commit log: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/ports/branches/2015Q4/?view=log However, if you're unsure, it's appropriate to set the merge-quarterly flag to ? *any time* you think that (or are not entirely sure whether) a change/issue may need to be committed to quarterly. Really. We'd rather quarterly become high value and deal with a few more issues that have the flag incorrectly set (and deny the request), than missing commits/fixes that go into head that should be merged, but aren't. If you have any more questions, head on over to #freebsd-ports on freenode or #bsdports on Efnet IRC and you can ask as many as you want :) ./koobs