From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 7 07:10:17 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FBAE16A4D8; Sat, 7 May 2005 07:10:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from asclepius.uwa.edu.au (asclepius3.uwa.edu.au [130.95.128.60]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09D9643D82; Sat, 7 May 2005 07:10:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from zanchey@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au) Received: from asclepius.kas (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asclepius.uwa.edu.au (Postfix) with SMTP id 1C02B1846AE; Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:14 +0800 (WST) Received: from asclepius (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asclepius.prekas (Postfix) with SMTP id 0AEE61846AB; Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:14 +0800 (WST) X-UWA-Client-IP: 130.95.13.9 (UWA) Received: from mooneye.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (mooneye.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au [130.95.13.9]) by asclepius.input (Postfix) with ESMTP id E49D81840F7; Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:13 +0800 (WST) Received: by mooneye.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Postfix, from userid 801) id 293F717F15; Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:13 +0800 (WST) Received: from mussel.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (mussel.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au [130.95.13.18]) by mooneye.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB54617E71; Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:12 +0800 (WST) Received: from zanchey (helo=localhost) by mussel.ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au with local-esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DUJS0-0005fx-00; Sat, 07 May 2005 15:10:12 +0800 Date: Sat, 7 May 2005 15:10:12 +0800 (WST) From: David Adam To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu In-Reply-To: <20050506044846.2473f92c@it.buh.tecnik93.com> Message-ID: References: <1115337385.0@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <20050506044846.2473f92c@it.buh.tecnik93.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Formal (236/050427) X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Detect Hard [UCS 290904] X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: SysLog X-SpamTest-Info: Profile: Marking Spam - Subject (UCS) [02-08-04] X-SpamTest-Status: Not detected X-SpamTest-Version: SMTP-Filter Version 2.0.0 [0125], KAS/Release cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org cc: FreeBSD gnats submit Subject: Re: docs/80681: articles/problem-reports: don't tell people they should sumbit a PR each time they see an outdated port X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 07:10:17 -0000 > > Why not just "If you are reporting a new version of a port, try to contact > > the port's maintainer first."? > > So that I don't see PR but post on ports@ ? Well, it will be an > improvement, at least no one will have to close them. I have two primary problems with the proposed patch - It's poorly written. This can be fixed. - The general message that it gives is not one I think is beneficial. We should be trying to remove barriers for people to report problems, not institute them. I can understand that you want to reduce the amount of waffle in the PR database, but I think your proposed change is too complicated and too negative. Now, I am not a committer nor subscribed to ports@, but surely hitting the Delete key once or twice a week more often is not that huge a price to pay? I propose that this patch be shortened to: --- article.sgml.orig 2005-01-15 10:16:42.000000000 +0800 +++ article.sgml 2005-05-07 15:07:06.622424000 +0800 @@ -106,7 +106,8 @@ Notification of updates to externally maintained software (mainly ports, but also externally maintained base system components such as BIND or various GNU - utilities). + utilities). If you are reporting a new version of a + port, try contacting the port's maintainer first. David Adam zanchey@ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au