svn commit: r307833 - head/x11-toolkits/fox16

[b. f.]

On 11/27/12, Pietro Cerutti <gahr at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 2012-Nov-27, 07:37, b. f. wrote:
>> On 11/27/12, Pietro Cerutti <gahr at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > Author: gahr
>> > Date: Tue Nov 27 11:08:55 2012
>> > New Revision: 307833
>> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/307833
>> >
>> > Log:
>> >   - Update to 1.6.47
>> >     * Prototype of wndproc() was not correct for 64-bit Windows.
>> >   - Remove shlib versions from LIB_DEPENDS
>> >
>> >   Feature safe:	yes
>>
>> I'm confused: we have changes like this that clearly aren't feature
>> safe going into the tree without explicit permission from portmgr, and
>> Ken stating that the release was moving forward with only a limited
>> set of packages.  So is the ports tree still frozen, or not?
>
> Well I didn't see it as a sweeping change, since only a handful of ports
> were changed. I guess personal judgment is needed to sort out
>
> "A sweeping change is a commit that would affect a non-trivial number of
> packages"
>
> from
>
> "shared library version bumps" (which are said to qualify as sweep
> commits)
>
> In this case, only a few (and small) ports were affected, which is why I
> went forward.

Could we have a clear and explicit statement from portmgr about what
is permitted? I don't mean to pick on Pietro: this question keeps
coming up.  A number of us have been using the rule of thumb that any
non-cosmetic change that affects more than one default package isn't
possible without permission.  If there is a lesser standard, or if the
tree should be considered frozen only for a subset of packages that
will be on the release media, then I can start making a few changes
that some users have requested.

b.