From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 5 19:20:01 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@smarthost.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DB07B72 for ; Mon, 5 May 2014 19:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 193BE5D49 for ; Mon, 5 May 2014 19:20:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s45JK0w6057557 for ; Mon, 5 May 2014 19:20:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id s45JK0fG057556; Mon, 5 May 2014 19:20:00 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 19:20:00 GMT Message-Id: <201405051920.s45JK0fG057556@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: "C Hutchinson" Subject: Re: ports/188127: net/wackamole : deprecate Reply-To: "C Hutchinson" X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 19:20:01 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/188127; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "C Hutchinson" To: =?utf-8?B?UmVuw4PCqSBMYWRhbg==?= Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org, portmaster@bsdforge.com Subject: Re: ports/188127: net/wackamole : deprecate Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT) > Feel free to have this port resurrected once net/spread is fixed > (fetchable, staged). Note that the maintainer did not reply to this PR > at all. > > René > Hello, René, and thank you for your reply. I think I'm a bit confused. My motivation for addressing ports/188853 (net/spread) was to prevent some 12 ports from being deleted, as they all depended on net/spread. So I added a new reliable MASTER_SITES, and provided STAGE support, and submitted it as ports/188853. Some 2 weeks ago. So as you can see, the patch (diff) I submitted, fixed net/spread 2 weeks ago. But somebody with a commit bit needs to commit it. Are only people with commit bit's allowed to make patches? Apologies. But I just don't understand why all these ports can't be saved, since I've already created a patch(1). Thank you for all your time, and consideration. --Chris