Patch will be attached after getting PR#.
Created attachment 264345 [details] v0 (apply via 'git am') Please make sure to apply this via 'git am', not 'patch <' or 'git apply'.
Hi, thanks for an update to the port. I would suggest utilizing MOVED file for informing the removal of qt5 flavor and unflavorization: - Remove PKGNAMESUFFIX=-qt6 from Makefile - Add entries something like the following to MOVED net-p2p/tremotesf@qt5|net-p2p/tremotesf|2025-10-08|Upstream removed qt5 support and it is now qt6 only, unflavorize port net-p2p/tremotesf@qt6|net-p2p/tremotesf|2025-10-08|Port is now qt6 only, unflavorize port
Created attachment 264405 [details] v1 (apply via 'git am') (In reply to Hiroki Tagato from comment #2) > - Add entries something like the following to MOVED Section 11.2.2 of Porter's Handbook [0] and the file itself are both confusing -- neither mention flavors, they indicate port only. But okay, change added. > - Remove PKGNAMESUFFIX=-qt6 from Makefile While appreciating your feedback, I have to respectfully disagree. As indicated in commit message, this would be POLA violation as those who have 'tremotesf-qt6' package installed (which is produced from default flavor) will not receive update in this case. If we keep suffix -- they will just run 'pkg upgrade' and voila, get 2.9.0. Thus, I would strongly prefer to keep suffix unless there's VERY good reason to not. [0]: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/porters-handbook/book/#moved-and-updating-moved
(In reply to Anton Saietskii from comment #3) I thought 'pkg upgrade' would automatically recognize the package name change if we had an appropriate MOVED entry. I did a small experiment in my private package repository what would happen if PKGNAMESUFFIX was removed and an entry was added to MOVED. What I found was 'pkg upgrade' did nothing. So you are absolutely right. Let's keep PKGNAMESUFFIX=-qt6 as it is now. One small comment about a MOVED entry: - In the following entry: net-p2p/tremotesf@qt6|net-p2p/tremotesf|2025-10-08|Qt 6 is the only supported version, de-flavorize The second field should read "net-p2p/tremotesf-qt6" instead of "net-p2p/tremotesf" (need -qt6 suffix). With that change, the patch I think is ready to commit.
(In reply to Hiroki Tagato from comment #4) > The second field should read "net-p2p/tremotesf-qt6" instead of "net-p2p/tremotesf" I don't believe so: $ grep tremotesf MOVED ; Tools/scripts/MOVEDlint.awk net-p2p/tremotesf@qt5||2025-10-08|Upstream removed Qt 5 support net-p2p/tremotesf@qt6|net-p2p/tremotesf-qt6|2025-10-08|Qt 6 is the only supported version, de-flavorize 1650: audio/kid3 does not have the kf5 flavor 4800: net-p2p/tremotesf-qt6 not found The _port_ (and the directory) is 'net-p2p/tremotesf'. The _package_ is 'tremotesf-qt6-2.9.0'. MOVED lists ports, not packages (and that's why it actually doesn't work for 'pkg' I believe). In theory, 'poudriere bulk <blah> net-p2p/tremotesf@qt6' after the patch applied should say to you 'port moved to <blah>', but this didn't ever worked for me.
(In reply to Anton Saietskii from comment #5) Ah... I forgot to check with MOVEDlint. So net-p2p/tremotesf is the correct value for "moved to" field. Now the patch is ready to go and I will commit the changes after double-checking build with poudriere. Thanks for checking.
A commit in branch main references this bug: URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/ports/commit/?id=78a4d1ccdc8982114e9dcd0fb1bda4d000c28d86 commit 78a4d1ccdc8982114e9dcd0fb1bda4d000c28d86 Author: Anton Saietskii <vsasjason@gmail.com> AuthorDate: 2025-10-06 09:49:54 +0000 Commit: Hiroki Tagato <tagattie@FreeBSD.org> CommitDate: 2025-10-10 20:55:21 +0000 net-p2p/tremotesf: update to 2.9.0 and de-flavorize Upstream removed Qt 5 support with this release. Despite removing flavors, "-qt6" suffix remains to comply with POLA. Additionally, adjust description to avoid confusion as other modern GUIs may exist too. Changelog: https://github.com/equeim/tremotesf2/blob/2.9.0/CHANGELOG.md PR: 290040 Reported by: Anton Saietskii <vsasjason@gmail.com> (maintainer) MOVED | 2 ++ net-p2p/tremotesf/Makefile | 26 +++++--------------------- net-p2p/tremotesf/distinfo | 6 +++--- net-p2p/tremotesf/pkg-descr | 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
Committed, thanks!
(In reply to commit-hook from comment #7) I'd like to kindly ask you to elaborate on the following commit changes which I believe were completely unnecessary, even erroneous: 1. According to section 9.5 of Committer's Guide [0], first letter of subject must be capitalized which it the case for my original, perfectly compliant patch. Also, changing comma to ' and ' makes commit message longer which contradicts section 9.3 [1] and just feels like the change for the sake of change, at least I don't see any real improvement here. 2. According to section 9.14 of the same [2], 'Reported by:' should be added when there's no PR. It would be greatly appreciated if you could explain the motivation of doing these. Thanks in advance. [0]: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/committers-guide/#_capitalize_the_first_letter_of_the_subject [1]: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/committers-guide/#_keep_subject_lines_short [2]: https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/committers-guide/#_include_appropriate_metadata_in_a_footer
(In reply to Anton Saietskii from comment #9) > According to section 9.5 of Committer's Guide [0], first letter of subject must be capitalized which it the case for my original, perfectly compliant patch. I must admit that I remembered it otherwise, which was wrong. So that is my fault. My apologies. > Also, changing comma to ' and ' makes commit message longer which contradicts section 9.3 [1] and just feels like the change for the sake of change, at least I don't see any real improvement here. Here I preferred glammatical correctness instead of saving a few letters. In general, commas are used to separate items in a list of three or more[1]. On the other hand, "and" is used to join two words or phrases[2]. Using "and" here does not make the subject line unneccesarily long and I think using correct English matters as well as adhering to the Committer's Guide. [1] https://www.grammarly.com/blog/punctuation-capitalization/comma/ [2] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/and > According to section 9.14 of the same [2], 'Reported by:' should be added when there's no PR. By "Reported by:" field, I wanted to show that the change is made by the maintainer of the port. In other words, I would like to express the port is well maintained by its maintainer. (The maintainer is doing a good work.) Although "Author:" field shows the authorship of the change, it does not show the maintainership of the port. So I used: Reported by: Name <Email> (maintainer) ^^^^^^^^^^^^ I hope those explanations make sense to you. Thanks for reading the commit message carefully. This conversation has been a good education for me.