Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:37:35 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Gmelin <grembo@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head <svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>, Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@FreeBSD.org>, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, "Timur I. Bakeyev" <timur@FreeBSD.org>, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-all <svn-ports-all@freebsd.org>, marino@freebsd.org, "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r361646 - in head/net/samba36: . files Message-ID: <20140716123735.GL48710@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <20140716142130.4eee44fb@bsd64.grem.de> References: <53C5618F.2020104@FreeBSD.org> <20140716094453.GA53961@FreeBSD.org> <53C65677.8060603@FreeBSD.org> <20140716111328.GB82901@FreeBSD.org> <53C6638E.6000801@FreeBSD.org> <20140716115304.GA5861@FreeBSD.org> <53C668C9.9030209@FreeBSD.org> <20140716120705.GA14729@FreeBSD.org> <53C66C3B.1000905@FreeBSD.org> <20140716142130.4eee44fb@bsd64.grem.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--9Jdw4pA1x1k2W7MG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 02:21:30PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:12:43 +0100 > Vsevolod Stakhov <vsevolod@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >=20 > > On 16/07/14 13:07, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 12:58:01PM +0100, Vsevolod Stakhov wrote: > > >> Again, I have no objections about licenses/comments/whatever. I > > >> want actually merely to figure out, which manifest's fields are > > >> *significant*. At this point, I can easily change this list without > > >> insulting users. On the contrary, after 1.3 release that would be > > >> hard. > > >=20 > > > Understood; sounds certainly reasonable. > > >=20 > > >> I suggest thus to stop bikescheding and switch to constructive > > >> discussion and define how should we distinguish one package from > > >> another. And no, we *cannot* rely on port version/revision/epoch > > >> only! > > >=20 > > > One thing that comes to mind is svn info /usr/ports/foo/bar | grep > > > Last Changed Rev. Then port (portupgrade) users won't get upset by > > > countless portrevs, and pkg will be able to rebuild (redistribute) > > > a package even if maintainer forgot to bump portrev (esp. for an > > > important update). > >=20 > > Then we would have different packages with the same version. And pkg > > will not perform an upgrade. Nontheless, in the current scheme, we > > take unnecessary fields, such as licenses or comments, into > > consideration. Moreover, manifest cannot rely on svn, so if you take > > a look on some manifest generated from a port you could figure out > > what fields are likely important and what fields are just > > meaningless. I'd like to remind that my current set is the following: > >=20 > > * name > > * origin > > * version > > * arch > > * options >=20 > I would remove these: >=20 > > * maintainer > > * www > > * message > > * comment >=20 > Rational: If any of those changes and it's important, the maintainer > will bump the revision anyway. None of these have any impact on how the > pkg works in practice, so a loppy maintainer won't harm the user here. portmgr can decide to activate project wild an options like we did "recentl= y" with ipv6 in that case we will not bump every single port. regards, Bapt --9Jdw4pA1x1k2W7MG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlPGcg8ACgkQ8kTtMUmk6ExDwQCfZAGbbYqRtfF3GKNFOhNXtb/6 Oz0Ani6npBDol9u9WlYfi9DLlIqKD10H =h8xK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9Jdw4pA1x1k2W7MG--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140716123735.GL48710>