#44777: p5-xml-twig @3.39 update to 3.48 (+add p5.18, p5.20, +formating) -------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: Joel.Brogniart@… | Owner: frank.mcpherson@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: p5-xml-twig | -------------------------------+------------------------------- Comment (by ryandesign@…): Ideally functional changes should be made separately from whitespace changes. When a diff makes whitespace changes to an entire portfile, it's difficult to identify what functional changes are also being made; this impedes code review and increases the likelihood that errors will be overlooked. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/44777#comment:2> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#44777: p5-xml-twig @3.39 update to 3.48 (+add p5.18, p5.20, +formating) -------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: Joel.Brogniart@… | Owner: frank.mcpherson@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: p5-xml-twig | -------------------------------+------------------------------- Comment (by larryv@…): Replying to [comment:3 Joel.Brogniart@…]:

What is the correct way to do that?

A ticket with two (or more) patches: a first patch for fonctional changes and then a second patch to apply after the first one for cosmetic changes or a ticket for each patch?

Two patches in one ticket is fine. Please generate them such that the functional patch is applied //last//; this keeps `svn blame` useful.

Should I update this ticket with new patches?

Yes, please. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/44777#comment:4> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#44777: p5-xml-twig @3.39 update to 3.48 (+add p5.18, p5.20, +formating) -------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: Joel.Brogniart@… | Owner: frank.mcpherson@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: p5-xml-twig | -------------------------------+------------------------------- Comment (by Joel.Brogniart@…): One more question. Adding 5.18 and 5.20 to perl branches should be done in the "cosmetic" patch or in the fonctional one? -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/44777#comment:6> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#44777: p5-xml-twig @3.39 update to 3.48 (+add p5.18, p5.20, +formating) -------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: Joel.Brogniart@… | Owner: frank.mcpherson@… Type: update | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: haspatch Port: p5-xml-twig | -------------------------------+------------------------------- Comment (by larryv@…): Replying to [comment:5 Joel.Brogniart@…]:

Is there a rule for Portfile file names in such a case. For one patch, I use Portfile.orig and Portfile to calculate the diff. But with chained patches do I use the same names again or could I use something like Portfile.orig, Portfile.1, …, Portfile?

Don’t worry too much about it; just make sure they apply. It’s trivial for the committer to use `patch FILENAME` instead of `patch -p`. Replying to [comment:6 Joel.Brogniart@…]:

One more question. Adding 5.18 and 5.20 to perl branches should be done in the "cosmetic" patch or in the fonctional one?

The whole point of the cosmetic patch is that it only changes the way the Portfile //looks//, not the way the Portfile //works//. Adding subports clearly changes how the Portfile works, so it is a functional change that should go in the functional patch. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/44777#comment:8> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X

#44777: p5-xml-twig @3.39 update to 3.48 (+add p5.18, p5.20, +formating) -------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: Joel.Brogniart@… | Owner: frank.mcpherson@… Type: update | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: fixed | Keywords: haspatch Port: p5-xml-twig | -------------------------------+------------------------------- Changes (by ryandesign@…): * cc: ryandesign@… (added) * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Maintainer timeout. I committed the whitespace changes (minus the removal of the long description) in r125266 and the update to 3.48 and the addition of the p5.18 and p5.20 subports in r125267. -- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/44777#comment:10> MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X