hamcrest-core and backing out changes

[Blair Zajac]

nox wrote:
> Le 28 avr. 09 à 19:04, Blair Zajac a écrit :
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> Regarding hamcrest-core r50259
>>
>>    Revert r50223, this port is called hamcrest-core and thus should 
>> install
>>    only hamcrest-core, please create an hamcrest-library port if you 
>> need it.
>>    By the way, this change broke junit port as it expects to find an
>>    hamcrest-core
>>
>> Please don't back out changes to commits without discussing it first, 
>> in an open-source project it's considered rude, especially since the 
>> port is marked as openmaintainer.  Additionally, finding out you 
>> backed out the change just through committing isn't cool.
>>
>> Also, my changes left in hamcrest-core.jar, so I don't know why you 
>> would see breakage, I didn't see it in my testing.  When I upgrade 
>> ports, I do something like
>>
>> $ port contents hamcrest-core | sort > 1
>> # install the new version of the port
>> $ port contents hamcrest-core | sort > 2
>> $ diff 1 2
>>
>> to make sure there's no missing files.  What error are you seeing?
>>
>> Regarding adding hamcrest-all.jar, I don't want another port just to 
>> install one more jar, I don't see the point in that.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Blair
> 
> I don't see the point in having a port which installs hamcrest-core AND 
> some other things even though it's called hamcrest-core. I thought you 
> also changed the final jar name as it would have been at least consistent.
> 
> A port installing more than it should have is in no way a more expected 
> thing than a big port installing less than you expect it to do (e.g. 
> python). What's the problem with one more jar? disk space?

Since my project needs more jars than just hamcrest-core.jar.  I'll create a new 
hamcrest port that includes all the jars.

Also, you didn't address my point about acceptable policy in backing out 
changes.  Next time you are backing out a change, please double check before 
doing so.

Regards,
Blair