From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 10:57:15 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/3] qt5: version bump In-Reply-To: <87a9fwonur.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> References: <1387288651-47952-1-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> <1387288651-47952-2-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> <87a9fwonur.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <20131220105715.4efa4168@skate> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Peter Korsgaard, On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:35:24 +0100, Peter Korsgaard wrote: > >>>>> "Vicente" == Vicente Olivert Riera writes: > > > -bump version to 5.2.0 > > -remove unneeded patches > > -remove invalid configure options > > > Signed-off-by: Vicente Olivert Riera > > --- > > package/qt5/qt5.mk | 4 +- > > ...-Add-egl-cflags-when-opengles2-is-enabled.patch | 32 ---- > > .../qt5/qt5base/qt5base-0003-uclibc-no-lfs.patch | 36 ----- > > This patch is still needed. > > > package/qt5/qt5base/qt5base-0008-qatomic-ppc.patch | 29 ---- > > And so is this. IMO, this is a good reason, for package bumps, to *require* in the commit log some details about how patches are updated: why some patches are removed, some others added, and the others updated. By requiring this, we will really encourage people to think about the patches, and provide a justification as to why an existing patch is no longer needed. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com