svn commit: r442588 - in head/www: nginx nginx-full

[Sergey A. Osokin]

On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 08:24:24AM +0100, Bartek Rutkowski wrote:
> 
> > On 7 Jun 2017, at 23:06, Sergey A. Osokin <osa at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 02:32:17PM +0100, Bartek Rutkowski wrote:
> >>> On 5 Jun 2017, at 01:18, Sergey A. Osokin <osa at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Hi Bartek and Adam,
> >>> 
> >>> I don't think I can get this, so two questions for you guys:
> >>> o) what was the reason to bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx?
> >>> o) wouldn't it btter to just bump PORTREVISION in www/nginx-full?
> >> 
> >> Hi Sergey,
> >> 
> >> Let me explain it quickly: some time ago you've removed two external modules from www/nginx port, which is a master for www/nginx-full. The www/nginx-full had them in default options, what caused port/pkg build failures and to fix these I needed to remove these two no longer existing modules from default options. After doing so, since it *does* change the contents of the package, I needed to bump the PORTREVISION of www/nginx-full and there were few ways of doing so, but none of them was easy/simple as they were creating even complex scenarios in future bumps/updates, so, after consulting possible solutions with portmgr members, I've chosen one, that while not ideal, have solved the issue for now without creating other issues in future, that is to bump the master www/nginx revision.
> >> 
> >> Hope that helps.
> > 
> > Hi Bartek,
> > 
> > Please don't bump PORTREVISION on www/nginx when you need to do so
> > in www/nginx-full.
> 
> Sergey,
> 
> I tried to explain you why it was necessary - it wasn't my 'oh, I just want to bump some ports revisions' spree. It was discussed with portmgr members and approved with adamw at . This is how master/slave relationship works in our ports and there was no other better way around it. Hope you'll understand that and accept it in future, where similar action would be required.

Bartek,

Explanations are wrong.  Again, I see no reason to bump revision in www/nginx because
it was possible to bump it in www/nginx-full.

If you guys ready to support www/nginx without my hamble opinion, please let me know,
I'll pass the maintainership of it to you immediately.

-- 
Sergey Osokin