"Michael Zoon" <ma.z...@quicknet.nl> wrote: > >From: Jerry <je...@seibercom.net>
> >Bash is currently at Bash-Release: 4.2, patch level 42. The port's > >version is only at patch level 37, which was released on 16-Jul-2012. > >This is an important port and since the freeze is over with, I was > >wondering if this port will be updated? > Hi, i have send last month the port maintainer also the latest files > To upgrade the port with latest patches. > > However some months ago there was also problems > to get the latest patches for bash into the port system. > Many people did jump in here to get it done. > > Digest 480 of 30-07-2012 says a lot > Including the ones a few versions older. > > On the latest files I did send I did get no response at all > That's why I no longer will forward patches for bash. > But I agree that it is a important port and patches are not released for > nothing. On the other hand every patch has the potential of introducing new bugs so being conservative with updates is a valid strategy, too, and in the end it's up to the maintainer who'd take the blame for the breakage. Obviously being conservative isn't a good reason not to respond to patches, but if you don't submitted them as a PR there is also no way to know if your mail actually made it to the maintainer (or if maybe his answer didn't reach your inbox). From your point of view sending a PR would also have the advantage of forcing the maintainer to either explicitly reject it or accept that somebody else commits it after a timeout. > But in the end its all upon the port maintainer to do it or not. > I really hope it not will take 6 months again to get the outdated port > updated. It looks like there currently is no shells/bash-devel, so why don't you submit it? You could then keep it at the bleeding edge and users could decide for themselves which update strategy they prefer. Fabian
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
