On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 9:38 PM, jhell <jh...@dataix.net> wrote: > On 07/24/2010 23:38, Rob Farmer wrote: >> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:49 PM, jhell <jh...@dataix.net> wrote: >>> # New ports collection makefile for: python26 >>> # Date created: 3 July 2003 >>> # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang <pe...@freebsd.org> >>> # >>> # $FreeBSD: ports/lang/python27/Makefile,v 1.166 2010/05/12 12:13:06 wen >>> Exp $ >>> >>> PORTNAME= python26 >>> PORTVERSION= 2.6.5 >>> >> >> It's a repocopy - in cases like this, instead of starting a fresh file >> at version 1.1, one of the cvs administrators copies the files from >> the old port so that the history is maintained. So, the copy happened, >> but a committer hasn't actually upgraded the port yet. >> >> It's discussed in the committers guide: >> http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/article.html#AEN1391 >> > > > No offense but I already know this. I do appreciate the time you took to > explain this with the additional link. Thank you. > > I guess I should have made it more clear. > > +===========================================+ > | This happened?: 2010/05/12 12:13:06 | > | And the date now: 2010/07/25 00:08:51 | > +===========================================+
Sorry - I didn't look at it very closely and assumed you were curious about repocopies, since they aren't mentioned in the Porter's Handbook and I suspect most non-committers don't read the Commiter's Handbook. -- Rob Farmer > > This is more than 2 months that nothing has been done with this port. > Unless I am wrong and the repo-copy is recent with an old date but I > thought that the ident(1) line was/is/should be updated when this happens?. > > After a repo-copy I would have thought that these lines should have been > updated to establish the new port and for whom created it, which would > then be re-committed bumping the version to 1.167 and recent date so > there is no confusion. > > # New ports collection makefile for: python26 > # Date created: 3 July 2003 > # Whom: Hye-Shik Chang <pe...@freebsd.org> > > A nice part about it is you can switch your ORIGIN to that and be all > set for the upgrade. ;) > > Any way I just wanted to give a heads up for this as it seemed pretty > odd as things like this usually happen and get updated all about the > same time that a repo-copy happens & this has been in ports that I know > of for more than ~1.5 weeks without any sort of update. > > > Regards, > > PS: > > These were not followed from the link above. > > When a port has been repo copied: > > 1. Do a force commit on the files of the copied port, stating > repository copy was performed. > > 2. Upgrade the copied port to the new version. Remember to change the > LATEST_LINK so there are no duplicate ports with the same name. In some > rare cases it may be necessary to change the PORTNAME instead of > LATEST_LINK, but this should only be done when it is really needed -- > e.g. using an existing port as the base for a very similar program with > a different name, or upgrading a port to a new upstream version which > actually changes the distribution name, like the transition from > textproc/libxml to textproc/libxml2. In most cases, changing LATEST_LINK > should suffice. > > > -- > > jhell,v > > _______________________________________________ freebsd-python@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-python To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-python-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
