User Details
- User Since
- Feb 4 2015, 1:12 PM (480 w, 2 d)
Jan 8 2024
Oct 31 2023
Looks good for me.
Oct 22 2023
Looks good.
Feb 16 2023
Dec 12 2022
Nov 17 2022
Jun 21 2022
Apr 22 2022
Apr 18 2022
Apr 14 2022
Apr 13 2022
Mar 21 2022
Jul 13 2021
Jun 29 2021
devel/py-subversion requires python2 when it is build for LTS, and it could be removed (don't support py-subversion-lts at all).
BTW, why do you want to remove this port? It doesn't depend on python2.7. It install some scripts, which are python27-esque, but it is optional tools. Core "subversion" binary is build & runs without pyhton2.7, I've checked it :-)
Yes, both 1.10 and 1.14 are LTS. When 1.14 had been released, I been asked to leave -lts as 1.10 for some time by -lts consumers. Maybe, now it is not relevant anymore.
Problem is, devel/subversion and devel/subversion-lts are different ports, even if we bump -lts to 1.14.x: yes, version will be the same, but origins will be different and in the future, when (if?) 1.15 will be released, we will need -lts (as 1.14.x) AGAIN. And users of -lts port will need to migrate between ports twice.
I don't think it is good idea, as LTS means "long term support" and its removal and then resurrection looks strange: is it really long term support if you remove it?!
Better to have two ports with same version (for now!), but with different QoS, IMHO.
Jun 26 2021
I was asked by several people to left subversion-lts as 1.10.x till version AFTER 1.14 will be released (and then updated -lts to 1.14).
I'm not sure, maybe we need to bump -lts to 1.14 now instead of removing it and adding it later. There are some organizations which want to use -lts version, and removal is bad for them.
May 27 2021
May 25 2021
I'm writing this comment to this change almost arbitrary, as it is meta-comments on your (great!) work.
May 21 2021
Feb 19 2021
Feb 16 2021
Feb 10 2021
Feb 4 2021
Feb 3 2021
Jan 13 2021
Dec 23 2020
Regenerate against new git repository
Regenerate against new git repository
Regenerate against fresh git repository.
Dec 13 2020
Sep 11 2020
Rebase & fix conflicts
"Rebase" to latest head, solve conflicts.
Aug 21 2020
Jun 10 2020
Jun 6 2020
Jun 5 2020
Jun 4 2020
Jun 3 2020
Jun 2 2020
May 31 2020
May 7 2020
Looks good for my part.
May 6 2020
It helps me on 13-CURRENT with em, igb and ix.
Apr 4 2020
Apr 2 2020
Mar 20 2020
Mar 18 2020
Mar 17 2020
Feb 27 2020
Feb 12 2020
It works, but it requires full (and old, EOL) java/openjdk8 as runtime dependency which results in additional 147MiB of files installed (please, look at diff summary for numbers). When you build NanoBSD image for small system, additional 147MiB could double your image size easily. There is no official way to install java/openjdk8-jre as runtime dependency, and if your hack package (by editing manifest) or install net-mgmt/unifi5 without java/openjdk8 (with pkg add -f), combination of net-mgmt/unifi5 and java/openjdk8-jre will be 54MiB larger than result of this port, still.
Feb 11 2020
Add license
portlint nitpicks have been fixed.
Address comments.
Add JDK13 support.