On Jan 8, 2013, at 18:34, Blair Zajac wrote: > On 01/08/2013 04:26 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >> >> On Jan 8, 2013, at 17:03, Frank Schima wrote: >> >>> On Jan 8, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >>> >>>> Is fixing a broken man page (or broken documentation, in general) worth a >>>> rev bump? The current zsh has a broken zshall(1). >>> >>> Yes. Anytime the installed files change or a dependency changes but the >>> version does not, the port should get a revision increase. >> >> I agree. But sometimes there are complaints about rebuilds being requested >> for small updates like this. To make the update more substantial, try to >> combine this change with something else if possible, like a version update >> or fixing some outstanding bug in the port. If there aren't any other >> changes that could be made now, then go ahead and commit just this fix with >> the revbump; better to fix the bug than not to. > > Isn't that a less of a problem with our binary packages?
True, part of the complaint was build time, which is now reduced for those who can use the binary packages. But not everyone can. And for those who can, the new complaint could just as easily be time to download the binary package. :/ _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
