From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 20 16:55:38 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEBD616A420 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:55:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1989313C43E for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:55:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2007 16:55:15 -0000 Received: from nat-wh-1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (EHLO mobileKamikaze.norad) [129.13.72.169] by mail.gmx.net (mp052) with SMTP; 20 Oct 2007 18:55:15 +0200 X-Authenticated: #5465401 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+bHvBJrqGbihjTzrU1McsZTyCY8wL7CEASUSzttC vMJyCoH4NlhLdO Message-ID: <471A32F2.3060402@gmx.de> Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 18:55:14 +0200 From: "[LoN]Kamikaze" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071015) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Boris Samorodov References: <2365F582-9CA6-4E21-AF82-42791A2F8E10@gmail.com> <471A0C34.6060505@gmx.de> <32214370@ipt.ru> In-Reply-To: <32214370@ipt.ru> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Cc: Q , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Appropriate way of submitting multiple related ports at once? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:55:38 -0000 Boris Samorodov wrote: > On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 16:09:56 +0200 [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: >> Q wrote: > >>> I have written a collection of ports (16 in total) for building a >>> typical Apple WebObjects deployment environment. As most of these ports >>> depend on one another in some way could someone advise what the most >>> appropriate way to submit these ports as a bundle would be? > >> Why don't you just pack them all into a single shar archive and submit them as >> one PR? That's what I'd do. > > I'd say that this depends upon the sibmitters' experience with ports > PRs. If there is none committers' questions, etc at the PR - it's > fine. Otherwise I'd prefer to deal with ports per PR. > > > WBR Well, you can submit several shar files in one PR and they can be tested, patched and commited one by one. The PR simply would be closed after all ports have successfully been committed.