Misuse of PORTREVISION (Re: svn commit: r434379 - head/multimedia/x265)

[Tijl Coosemans]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 13:31:10 -0500 "Mikhail T." <mi+thun at aldan.algebra.com> wrote:
> On 21.02.2017 13:19, Tijl Coosemans wrote:
>> We do still support regular "make install clean" right?  Doing a
>> PORTREVISION bump is the way we inform users to rebuild that port.  
> "make install clean", while possibly the only thing worth directly 
> supporting, has nothing to do with REBUILDING the port.
>> Without that they would have to look for library version changes all the
>> time.  
> My point -- from the beginning -- was that such signaling /can/ be 
> automatic, and therefore /should/ be automatic.
> 
> For example, when a port is (about to be) upgraded, a check can be 
> performed to warn the user, that removing the current version will break 
> a depending port -- and offer to uninstall it too. pkg would already do 
> that -- unless invoked with -f...
> 
> Or, perhaps, the older shared libraries belonging to older versions of 
> the already-upgraded ports can be preserved somewhere -- like 
> $PREFIX/lib/compat, which is where portupgrade puts them.
> 
> But this automation is not going to happen as long as we keep the 
> manually-maintained crutch...

While you work on making it automatic you need to keep bumping
PORTREVISION.  You cannot deliberately break things to force others
to make it automatic.