Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:15:47 +0200 From: Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> To: marino@freebsd.org, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>, Antoine Brodin <antoine@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r367783 - head Message-ID: <541AF723.1000507@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <540F74AB.3020605@marino.st> References: <201409092112.s89LCtUa094817@svn.freebsd.org> <540F6E85.2050105@marino.st> <540F70A7.6030904@FreeBSD.org> <540F74AB.3020605@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 09.09.2014 um 23:44 schrieb John Marino: > On 9/9/2014 23:27, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 9/9/2014 4:17 PM, John Marino wrote: >> I understand your reaction, but it's just the longstanding convention. I >> find it a bit rude too, but it speaks to the quality we expect of each >> other. Had this all not been fixed quickly we would not have packages >> this week. > > The pointy hat was on the MOVED entry although I guess I deserve one for > removing the port in the first place. > > The convention is not cool. I say it's time to retire this tradition. > If one really wants to make a point, send a private email. Have some > class, this is just rubbing a mistake in somebody's face. This does not > make somebody's work better since they'll know about the error when they > see the commit. I'd cast a ballot with the same mark as John's here. Sometimes I'm lazy and mingle some things in one message with a broader distribution list, but guilt assignments don't get us anywhere. What we COULD do is add a Regression: <SVN revision>[, <SVN revision> [...]] field and let the system look up whose commit caused the regressions and add them to the Cc: or Bcc: (to be discussed). That way we clearly get people on the hook without pointing fingers in public.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?541AF723.1000507>