Instafix for FreeBSD ports brokenness on 10.0?

[Chris Rees]

On 30 Sep 2011 00:14, "Stanislav Sedov" <stas at freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:40:36 -0400
> Eitan Adler <lists at eitanadler.com> mentioned:
>
> > The ports tree can be very fickle and touching a large class of ports
> > requires multiple exp-runs. Attempting these types of changes
> > just prior to release adds a degree of risk which no one wants to
accept.
> >
>
> Who don't want to accept this?
> Who is making this decision for everyone?
>
> > Affecting *every single port* is not a negligible risk.
>
> I can easily commit whatever I want to bsd.ruby.mk right now
> affecting all the ports (and nobody will say a word), but we can't
> do a conditional fix in bsd.port.mk?  I'd say the first one poses
> much a higher risk (and I never did a single exp-run for that).
>
> Seriously, just look at the commits happening right now.  Here's
> one example (the most recent commit, not picking up anything):
> 15:22 < CIA-28> [ports] glarkin * devel/Makefile: - Hook py-zope.interface
to the build
>
> So now tell me how
> .if ${OSVERION} > SOMETHING
>        do something
> .endif
>
> in bsd.port.mk
>
> is more risky then that particular commit which can potentially break
> devel/ for all OSVERSIONs.
>

bsd.ruby.mk is only included for ports that ask for it- hardly the same.

Chris