| 1 |
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 10/06/2015 06:33 AM, William Hubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I don't think the revbump of net-misc/openconnect-7.06-r1 to -r2 was |
| 4 |
>> necessary. When the change purely affects use flags, that is picked up |
| 5 |
>> by the pm and there is no need to force everyone to rebuild the package. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> The same goes for dependency changes if the package manager has an |
| 8 |
> option like emerge --changed-deps. So, apparently the assumption is that |
| 9 |
> all relevant package managers implement behavior like emerge --newuse |
| 10 |
> and/or --changed-use, but they don't necessarily implement --changed-deps? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Are there any negative consequences if you don't rebuild a package |
| 13 |
that has new use flags, as there are if you don't rebuild one with new |
| 14 |
dependencies (in some circumstances)? In situations where there are, |
| 15 |
we should revbump. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The discussion around bumping on dep changes isn't necessarily to bump |
| 18 |
them ANYTIME a dep changes, but only under some circumstances. (In |
| 19 |
the more general cases you'd bump most of the time, but there are a |
| 20 |
bunch of cases where you wouldn't have to, and some of them would |
| 21 |
otherwise result in bumping dozens of packages at once.) So, there is |
| 22 |
benefit to bumping even if every PM had an option like --changed-deps. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Rich |
Archives