[47804] trunk/dports/devel/cmake/Portfile

[cssdev at mac.com]

On Mar 8, 2009, at 7:09 AM, Blair Zajac wrote:

> On Mar 7, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On Mar 7, 2009, at 17:06, Bryan Blackburn wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 05:50:09PM -0500, cssdev at mac.com said:
>>>
>>>> I think we should require port commits to reference existing,  
>>>> open Trac
>>>> tickets.
>>>
>>> For all commits?  That would be horrible, then I'd have to create  
>>> a ticket
>>> every time I wanted to update my own ports as well.

Well, one could make multiple commits against one ticket, but yes. :)  
Where does one draw the line between commits requiring tickets and  
commits that can be made by anyone with a bit? Are tickets only for  
commits that might need some discussion? If you're trying to track  
changes and the reasons behind them, is it just a matter of digging  
through the commit history? Browsing through related tickets? Both? I  
think it's really not so horrible for developers to describe changes  
in a consistent place before making commits into a repository.

>> After a little consideration I have to agree with Bryan. There are  
>> many times when I want to fix a port's whitespace, or fix a typo in  
>> a comment, or make another minor modification for which there's no  
>> ticket. Forcing me to make a ticket every time would be annoying. I  
>> agree there are some commits that have occurred without tickets  
>> where tickets would have been desirable, but I think the  
>> disadvantages of using this hook outweigh its benefits for MacPorts.
>
> +1.  A little too much process there.  The commit message should  
> fully describe the change if there's no Trac ticket then.

I appreciate the feedback, and I recognize that such a hook might be  
too cumbersome for MacPorts. I also appreciate the proactive  
enhancements that help to benefit the project and move things forward.  
I'll get back to checking my builds! :)

Thanks,
Chris