Maintainer Update to net/py-bittornado-0.3.7_2,1 to version 0.3.9,1 Removed file(s) - man files already included: - files/bittorrent-downloader.1 - files/bittorrent-multi-downloader.1 - files/btcompletedir.1 - files/btcopyannounce.1 - files/btdownloadcurses.1 - files/btdownloadheadless.1 - files/btlaunchmany.1 - files/btlaunchmanycurses.1 - files/btmakemetafile.1 - files/btreannounce.1 - files/btrename.1 - files/btsethttpseeds.1 - files/btshowmetainfo.1 - files/bttrack.1 Better CONFLICTS pattern. Hopefully fixes python 2.4 incompatiblities. New download location. Doc files location are splitted. Generated with FreeBSD Port Tools 0.63 How-To-Repeat: Apply this diff.
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->mezz I'll take this.
State Changed From-To: open->feedback I have three questions, you don't need to recreate patch. 1) I think, you should put 'a' in PORTVERSION. Hide it is not very nice. :-) 2) Why make it complicate for DOC_FILES1, DOC_FILES2 and etc? Didn't you get my email of patch? It seems to be lesser complicate by doing docs/*.txt. http://people.freebsd.org/~mezz/diff/py-bittornado.diff If above patch is ok, then I can merge with your for update MASTER_SITES. 3) This looks like you took some of my patch? If you do, then in future, please give the credit.
Hi Jeremy, On Fri, 17 Dec 2004, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > Synopsis: [MAINTAINER] net/py23-BitTornado: update to 0.3.9 > > State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback > State-Changed-By: mezz > State-Changed-When: Fri Dec 17 22:46:55 GMT 2004 > State-Changed-Why: > I have three questions, you don't need to recreate patch. I read your e-mails after I sent the patch yesterday afternoon. I did not want to duplicate the work, but I promised some guys who had problem with the current bittornado to upgrade and try to fix the python 2.4 compatibility problem as soon as possible. I had several deadlines recently, I did not have time to read my e-mails. I wanted to do the work first, and then go on reading the e-mails. I noticed you mail and patch after I submitted mine. Sorry. > > 1) I think, you should put 'a' in PORTVERSION. Hide it is not very nice. :-) I decided to hide the 'a' for the following reason. One of the earlier version was not incremented properly: [number].[number].[number]b and after that [number].[number].[number], therefore I had to bump the PORTEPOCH. I wanted to avoid this situation just simply put new PORTREVISION for each letter changes. But you are rigth, it is better to but there 'a'. > > 2) Why make it complicate for DOC_FILES1, DOC_FILES2 and etc? Didn't you get > my email of patch? It seems to be lesser complicate by doing docs/*.txt. > > http://people.freebsd.org/~mezz/diff/py-bittornado.diff > > If above patch is ok, then I can merge with your for update MASTER_SITES. I looked to your patch. Yes your solution is cleaner, however I don't like the idea to put wildcard characters into the Makefile. > > 3) This looks like you took some of my patch? If you do, then in future, > please give the credit. > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=75191 Sorry, my explanation might answer to you. Please add a credit line to you in the CVS, if you have commit bit. Kindest Regards, Janos Mohacsi
State Changed From-To: feedback->closed Committed, thanks!