Re: git: 2b06f1a68579 - main - shells/bash53: Add bash 5.3

Am 07.07.2025 um 18:46 schrieb Emanuel Haupt:
> That said, if there's consensus to update the "primary" port directly,
> I'm more than happy to go that route.

if the port is seen as an unstable version why not mark it bash-dev for 
a version the normal user should not use.

And use the port name bash for the stable version that is recommended to 
be used and yes new version can break something and this should then be 
documented in UPDATING.
If you want to provide the older version, there you can use a specific 
PKGNAMESUFFIX and also document that in UPDATING.

Do no forget that many ports have dependencies to bash and if you start 
to change the naming schema here, you maybe break them.

This is the way many ports are working and is maybe also a way to go here.

A normal user is just doing a `pkg upgrade` and expects that upgrades 
are delivered for all installed ports.
Users are normally out, if they must switch from bash-xx to bash-xy and 
I personally agree here.
But if you name a new version of bash with a new port name, users will 
never get this, till old ports are removed and they are forced to do 
something.
I personally see that as a very user unfriendly way to manage port names.

Port names should be fixed and I do not see a reason for changing it, as 
long is there is a technical reason like conflicts.

Please, that is just my personal opinion.

Matthias

Gruß
Matthias

-- 

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning." --
Rich Cook