svn commit: r495383 - in head/java: . wildfly16 wildfly16/files

[Torsten Zuehlsdorff]

On 14.03.19 17:19, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 06:17:19PM +0100, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>>>> Log:
>>>>   New port: java/wildfly16
>> [...]
>>> Its name suggests it should've been repocopied from one of the earlier
>>> versions but it was not, why is that?
>>
>> I missed it, that is common for arkane rules.
> 
> There's nothing arcane about repocopies Kurt.  I'm honestly surprised
> why people make this mistake again and again.  When you resurrect a
> port you make a repocopy.  When you spin-off a new branch based on a
> previous version you make a repocopy (like you've added a new wildfly
> port, how could you not have noticed that there are a handful of ports
> thereof already?):
> 
>   $ grep wildfly /usr/ports/java/Makefile
>     SUBDIR += wildfly10
>     SUBDIR += wildfly11
>     SUBDIR += wildfly12
>     SUBDIR += wildfly13
>     SUBDIR += wildfly14
>     SUBDIR += wildfly15
>     SUBDIR += wildfly90
> 
> Upstream renames their software, you make a repocopy, etc.  

A rename should be a "svn mv" instead of "svn cp"? Or am i mistaken?

Greetings,
Torsten