> On Nov 1, 2016, at 3:55 PM, Daniel J. Luke <dl...@geeklair.net> wrote: > >> On Nov 1, 2016, at 3:36 PM, Lawrence Velázquez <lar...@macports.org> wrote: >> >> While I agree in principle that our committing should not be >> hampered by the buildbot and would welcome another solution, I'm not >> crazy about the idea of polluting our (permanent!) commit history >> with transient administrivia like this. > > A tag that indicates 'This commit was part of a mass change' (that > doesn't change the build product) doesn't seem like pollution in the > commit history to me, but I don't really care too much.
In the Trac ticket, Rainer linked to a Stack Overflow post that suggested modifying a dummy file. I'm more amenable to that method. > I imagine this could also be handled 'manually' by someone who could > temporarily disable the build infrastructure, make the mass change, > and then bring the build infrastructure back up. I think GitHub would eventually redeliver the failed webhook payload in that case. vq _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev