Subject: Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/audio/bmp
To: None <tech-pkg@NetBSD.org>
From: David Brownlee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/14/2004 16:35:05
Given a choice between having a package have a local patch
in pkgsrc to make it the same as the most recent version,
or having the most recent version in pkgsrc I would be
inclined to think we should always have the most recent
- Developers need to maintain state as to what packages are
in this condition so they do not update them
- If a file affected by any of the patches is changed in the
next version it makes updating potentially full of
- Users will think pkgsrc has older versions
- Users can less reliably compare pkgsrc version with a non
pkgsrc version installed on another system regarding features
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 03:21:53PM +0200, Juan RP wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:14:20 +0200 Lubomir Sedlacik wrote:
> > >
> > > could you please tell me what was the point in upgrading this
> > > package?
> > >
> > > as stated in the PR:
> > >
> > > "I've diffed bmp 0.9.6 and 0.9.6.1, the changes are very very
> > > minimal, they've just incorporated patch-af, so it's no longer used
> > > and thus removed by my patch"
> > >
> > > now we have two identical packages with different version numbers,
> > > confused people who upgrade for no reason, waster space on ftp,
> > > unnecessary revisions in cvs, just for a sake of "blindly committing
> > > a random from a PR".
> > >
> > > did you even bother to read the PR trail before committing?
> > Why do you mean both version are the same? if patch-af was added into
> > the new version, they aren't... right?
> the package you install from both versions will be the same, there is no
> difference in having patch-af in our repository or being incorporated in
> the upstream distribution. the only difference between these two
> packages is the version number.
> different version number means:
> - distfile is stored on ftp.NetBSD.org and its mirrors (wasted space)
> - (possible) packages build from both versions will be stored on
> ftp.NetBSD.org and its mirrors (again, wasted space)
> - unnecessary revisions in cvs, and all the related things (mirrors,
> cvsweb, ...)
> - people will think the package is different and thus upgrade
> - etc.
> of course, most of these are not critical but it makes a bad precedent.
> > What's wrong on closing PRs?
> there is nothing wrong in closing PRs. this PR should have been closed,
> without applying the patch. blindly applying patches from PRs and
> closing them, on the other hand _is_ wrong.
David/absolute -- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --