Bug 216780 - Update Port: lang/sbcl
Summary: Update Port: lang/sbcl
Status: Closed FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Only Me
Assignee: freebsd-ports-bugs (Nobody)
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2017-02-04 14:15 UTC by Pavel Volkov
Modified: 2017-02-04 14:58 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments
maintainer changed (622 bytes, patch)
2017-02-04 14:15 UTC, Pavel Volkov
pavelivolkov: maintainer-approval+
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Pavel Volkov 2017-02-04 14:15:59 UTC
Created attachment 179596 [details]
maintainer changed

Hello. This is port yours, not my. Thanks for your learning.
Comment 1 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2017-02-04 14:22:06 UTC
I'm not taking the port.

Are you releasing maintainership?
Comment 2 Pavel Volkov 2017-02-04 14:32:08 UTC
(In reply to John Marino from comment #1)
I want to return the mechanism of bootstrap default by ccl. And to remove the dependency on legacy sbcl. You will be against?
Comment 3 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2017-02-04 14:34:27 UTC
Yes.
You have no reason to do that.
And you broke many ports the last time you did it.
Building by CCL is still supported; you only have to change the option.
For the SBCL option, the "legacy" sbcl is the correct way to build it.
Comment 4 Pavel Volkov 2017-02-04 14:41:51 UTC
(In reply to John Marino from comment #3)
I do not like this approach. I am willing to make changes to the port even in this form, but do not want to be maintainer. I'm releasing maintainership.
Comment 5 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2017-02-04 14:54:56 UTC
Fine by me.  If you still insist on your approach after breaking several ports and an entire platform (which signifies zero quality assurance was done on downstream ports) then it's best that the port returns to how it was before.

The word "legacy" is wrong too.
Right now the older bootstraps are sufficient.
If they get too old, it's a simple matter of repackaging the latest SBCL from FreeBSD 10.3.  This is the most correct method of building a compiler. 

You never gave your reasons for the change.  I have to assume you just thought it was easier to maintain that way.  Maintainership is hard sometimes.
Comment 6 commit-hook freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2017-02-04 14:57:42 UTC
A commit references this bug:

Author: marino
Date: Sat Feb  4 14:57:09 UTC 2017
New revision: 433314
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/433314

Log:
  lang/sbcl: reset maintainer upon request

  PR:	216780

Changes:
  head/lang/sbcl/Makefile