From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun  3 01:28:27 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 205001065673; Fri,  3 Jun 2011 01:28:27 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 01:28:27 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20110603012827.GB54712@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201106020616.p526GP0U053787@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20110602104141.GA50574@FreeBSD.org> <4DE803B9.5090903@FreeBSD.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4DE803B9.5090903@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/mariadb-client Makefile distinfo
	pkg-descr pkg-message pkg-plist
	ports/databases/mariadb-client/files mysql-server.in
	patch-extra::yassl::src::yassl_error.cpp patch-sql::mysqld.cc
	ports/databases/mariadb-scripts Makefile ...
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 01:28:27 -0000

* Doug Barton wrote:
> First, the ports were marked IGNORE when I did the forced commit to
> acknowledge the repo-copy, so I don't think I am violating any user
> expectations here.

Ah, yes, it's OK for IGNOREd ports.  Sorry for not checking this (maybe
it would made sense to mention that port is being IGNOREd along the
"this is WIP" lines in previous commit).

> Second, under normal circumstances I would agree with you, however the
> effort to split these ports has been more than I (foolishly?
> optimistically?) anticipated, so my usual method of committing the new
> version in one fell swoop wasn't going to be as easy as I had hoped. By
> clearing away the debris it makes it a lot easier for me to actually
> finish the work.

Fair enough, sorry to disturb you.  Just do not want other committers
think using CVS for WIP is good and acceptable *general* practice.

./danfe