Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:12:02 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: autoconf update Message-ID: <4C9306B2.9010401@bsdforen.de> In-Reply-To: <4C92F195.5000605@FreeBSD.org> References: <4C91446F.3090202@bsdforen.de> <20100916171744.GA48415@hades.panopticon> <4C927ED0.5050307@bsdforen.de> <86zkvhfhaa.fsf@gmail.com> <4C92C14D.3010005@FreeBSD.org> <4C92F195.5000605@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17/09/2010 06:41, Doug Barton wrote: > On 9/16/2010 6:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 9/16/2010 3:35 PM, Anonymous wrote: >>> Dominic Fandrey<kamikaze@bsdforen.de> writes: >>> >>>> On 16/09/2010 19:17, Dmitry Marakasov wrote: >>>>> * Dominic Fandrey (kamikaze@bsdforen.de) wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Just out of curiosity, why a version bump because of a build >>>>>> dependency? >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think an autoconf update should have an effect on any >>>>>> /running/ software but build systems. And I don't see how rebuilding >>>>>> all the software improves it. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is not a criticism - I just think there is something I don't >>>>>> understand and that worries me. >>> >>> My guess is to uncover *early* build failures that exp-run didn't catch. >> >> We shouldn't use our users to beta-test infrastructure changes. > > Sorry, I'm not feeling well atm and realize that I didn't write what I > was thinking here. What I intended to say was that we _don't_ > intentionally use the ports system to force our users to beta test > changes. I think it goes without saying that we _shouldn't_ do this, > although I think that changes like this are a platinum-coated example of > why we need to have -stable and -dev branches for ports. I used to disagree with this, because I thought it would create additional work load. I have come to think more favourably of the idea, because you can make more daring commits on a -dev branch and don't have to quick-fix everything that goes wrong. Also the time between a MFC does not have to be very long. A week should be more than enough time to uncover and solve all problems. So the delay to get updates and fixes on the -stable branch is not very long. Regards -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C9306B2.9010401>