svn commit: r477954 - head/databases/mantis

[Tobias Kortkamp]

On Sat, Aug 25, 2018, at 15:26, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 at 12:33, Tobias Kortkamp <tobik at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
> >   The checksums and sizes from 2.9.0 and 2.15.0 are identical because
> >   GH_TAGNAME was not updated as well, so the update to 2.15.0 never
> >   actually happened.
> > +PORTEPOCH=     1
> 
> Wouldn't it have made more sense to perform the actual update rather
> than have another port with PORTEPOCH (which is really a last-resort
> workaround)?

Updating things correctly takes time.  In the meantime we should not
pretend we have 2.15.0 when we do not, especially if this is supposed
to solve some security problems.

The update attempt is in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D16890 and is
waiting for some feedback to make sure it actually works not only
for me.  I would appreciate some real feedback rather than nitpicking
about now having PORTEPOCH.