Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

security/botan2: Update to 2.12.0
ClosedPublic

Authored by dmgk on Oct 12 2019, 6:09 PM.

Details

Summary
security/botan2: Update to 2.12.0

Changes:	https://botan.randombit.net/news.html#version-2-12-0-2019-10-07

PR:		241217
Submitted by:	Ralf van der Enden <tremere@cainites.net> (maintainer)
Test Plan

poudriere testport: OK (113a, 120i, 120a)

Diff Detail

Repository
rP FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable.
Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.

Event Timeline

dmgk created this revision.Oct 12 2019, 6:09 PM
tz accepted this revision.Oct 12 2019, 9:47 PM

Also there is no need to separate the commits between updates and bumping the PORTREVISION. This can be done in one commit. So please commit this and D22001 together! :)

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Oct 12 2019, 9:47 PM
dmgk added a comment.Oct 12 2019, 9:56 PM
In D22000#480674, @tz wrote:

Also there is no need to separate the commits between updates and bumping the PORTREVISION. This can be done in one commit. So please commit this and D22001 together! :)

Thanks for approving. I was told before to split updates like this to two separate commits - https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21716#473777 :)

This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.
tz added a comment.Oct 12 2019, 10:42 PM
In D22000#480687, @dmgk wrote:
In D22000#480674, @tz wrote:

Also there is no need to separate the commits between updates and bumping the PORTREVISION. This can be done in one commit. So please commit this and D22001 together! :)

Thanks for approving. I was told before to split updates like this to two separate commits - https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21716#473777 :)

Oh, i wasn't aware of this comment. I double checked the handbook (https://docs.freebsd.org/doc/4.5-RELEASE/usr/share/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/x387.html) but there is no rule for it. So it seems to be individual preference.
I personally prefer a single commit, because it is possible that there is an poudriere build right after the first commit, but before the second. In this scenario the user would end up with a broken software. If this happens on the cluster, it could be for several days in the worst case.
But since there is no rule feel free to get some other point of views and decide by yourself how to process such issues in the future!

Two separate commits makes it easier to write the history log and in case you need one day to make a revert, it will be more easier to identify the reason. But it is not mandatory, but it is what I have been doing since 2007.

dmgk added a comment.Oct 12 2019, 11:29 PM

Having two separate commits makes more sense to me too, but looking at the recent svn logs it seems that most committers prefer to do a single commit.

You have two "right" options, choose wisely :)