On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:08:52AM -0500, Greg Larkin wrote: > On 2/22/11 10:48 AM, Mark Linimon wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 08:18:14AM -0500, Greg Larkin wrote: > >> Is it a good idea to decrement PORTREVISION after the previous commit > >> has been in the tree for some number of hours? > > > > Nope. For instance, if a pointyhat run _had_ been started during that > > window, the uploaded package would now be wrong. > > > > mcl > > What's the proper fix at this point - rebump to current PORTREVISION+2, > or is a PORTEPOCH bump required? > Just reinstating it to PORTREVISON+1 should be good enough. There's no need to get the, few, people that may have upgraded during the time to upgrade again to +2. PKGVERSION needs to be the same or higher, it just cannot go down.
-erwin -- Erwin Lansing http://droso.org Prediction is very difficult especially about the future er...@freebsd.org
pgp0AdsxUvZAH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
