Bumping libreoffice

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 07:50:26PM +0100, Dominic Fandrey wrote:
> Please take note of Porters' Handbook section 5.2.2.1.
> 
> Build fixes are NOT a reason to bump portrevision!
> 

Working on ports like LibreOffice is painful enough to have such aggressive
reaction. First the bump is deserved just because the package with default
options changed and to help the maintainers knowing exactly which version people
are building when they report failures.
Second LibreOffice is really hard to get building with all the different variation
of the ports people can have ( mixed libstdc++, not uptodate version of dependencies,
people with weird cflags and ldflags, and so.
Jung-uk Kim is doing a terrific work that is totally uneasy. He manages to get
LibreOffice building correctly and working without too much revision bump.

Have a look at the history Jung-uk has never done any graticious bump on this
port.

I personnally resigned on maintaining LibreOffice exactly because of reactions
like this one, (also because Jung-uk Kim is actually doing a far better job on
it than me :)).

regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-office/attachments/20130208/610eb7b9/attachment.sig>