svn commit: r335584 - head/www/nginx/files

[Eygene Ryabinkin]

Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +--On 6 décembre 2013 18:56:13 +0400 Eygene Ryabinkin <rea at freebsd.org>
> wrote:
> | Nginx without syslog support will reject all configuration directives
> | like 'syslog daemon', so people were either not using syslog at all
> | or were patching the patch to properly embed syslog support into nginx.
> | 
> | Supposedly, the second category of people will get nginx with
> | enable-able syslog support from vanilla port at the next update
> | of their tree.  SYSLOG_SUPPORT is off by-default, so packages won't
> | be affected too.
> 
> Packages built with the default options won't be affected, yes.
> But for people not using packages, or building packages with non default
> options won't know there is a new version of the port.

Well, there are three kinds of users who aren't using packages
or are customizing them:

 - running with modified patch that will properly enable syslog
   support; they won't get anything new from this commit;

 - those who don't need syslog support; no news for them too;

 - those who wanted syslog support, built the port with it enabled,
   but got Nginx without syslog support and are looking for the
   port to be fixed.

Only third category of people can really require PORTREVISION bump.
I wasn't much convinced that they will get anything sensible from it,
because it won't magically "just work" for them, they will need to
upgrade their configs too.  Those who use custom packages will really
be in trouble: they won't get syslog support until PORTREVISION bump
(unless they will replace current package with the new one by hand).
Users who install directly from ports will, probably, fine, because
the only way to discover that syslog is now unbroken is to read commit
logs (or UPDATING); after this it is easy to do 'make all deinstall
install clean'.

> You have to bump PORTREVISION when what you change can change the
> package.

That's a rule of the thumb, but not a strict requirement at all times,
as I understand it.

So in this situation I am not very much sure that happiness from
PORTVERSION bump will outweight the need for upgrade by everyone
who uses Nginx.

Though I may be wrong.
-- 
Eygene Ryabinkin                                        ,,,^..^,,,
[ Life's unfair - but root password helps!           | codelabs.ru ]
[ 82FE 06BC D497 C0DE 49EC  4FF0 16AF 9EAE 8152 ECFB | freebsd.org ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 358 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/attachments/20131206/5da9cdb9/attachment.sig>