Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 12:17:27 -0600 From: Karl Denninger <karl@Denninger.Net> To: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Subject: Re: ports/15822: Update port misc/HomeDaemon to V0.99 Message-ID: <20000101121727.A35145@Denninger.Net> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.000101130138.andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM>; from Will Andrews on Sat, Jan 01, 2000 at 01:01:38PM -0500 References: <20000101113337.A89903@Denninger.Net> <XFMail.000101130138.andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jan 01, 2000 at 01:01:38PM -0500, Will Andrews wrote: > On 01-Jan-00 Karl Denninger wrote: > > Correct. My first submission got a reject and nasty comment back from > > one of your other committers that I violated the hier(7) rules - when I > > explained why I had done so, I got stony silence in reply. > > What?! I'm not a committer. I'm just another porter.. I simply stated that I > didn't think your port followed hier, and that it could be modified to do so. > But of course you thought it was an attack.. (and I did reply to that reply!). > I was NOT vituperating your efforts! I am sorry you think that is so. You never retrieved the port, you never looked it, you took a look ONLY at the shar file and made your call - without examining the evidence. > > So I went back to the code and did a LOT of work to conform and write > > installation code - even though it probably wasn't such a good idea, > > as I found out later, in that doing so (and doing the PLIST and other > > stuff "the FreeBSD way") made it really easy to LOSE a *LOT* of hard > > work for the users of the software. > > What's so hard about adding a few #define's as necessary and then using gcc > -DXX=\"blah\"? Maybe I just don't know how your program works. :) You don't. It has external dependancies, among other things, and further it has location-specific data that the user will be VERY unhappy to lose down the road. THAT was the reason for not putting it in "share" originally (to isolate both its DEPENDANTS *AND* the localized stuff). The second (localized stuff) is a reality until we start getting PCs with built-in GPS systems that work everywhere (the code needs to know where the machine is PHYSICALLY to compute day and night events, and I've yet to find an AUTOMATIC way to do that). > > The original was never committed because someone else (not you) has > > refused to do so. You closed the others which is fine, but none of the > > originals was ever committed, and in fact, since the first REJECT message > > I had no idea if you folks were *ever* going to commit the original - and > > had assumed the answer was *no*. > > Again, you're not checking the facts. Since when did I ever pass myself off as > a committer? Besides, if I were a committer, any other committer who disagreed > with my beliefs could argue with me about it, and certainly could decide to > import your port (him/her)self! > > And you seem to think that your port was "rejected" - but if you had noticed > the PR audit trail, none of the PRs were ever closed (and they would have been > if I had actually been a committer and actually had "rejected" your port). > > You seem to be taking my reflex reaction to your PLIST a little hard. I was > only trying to help ensure that if at all possible, we don't get (yet another) > port that violates hier (lesstif being one of the most glaring ones). I think > hier is one of the best things about FreeBSD, after all. Fine. Your call, of course. The code will and does live without you folks - after all, it was never intended as a PORT in the first place. > > I'll be happy to wait, but when someone tells me to go stuff, basically, > > and then does not reply to my follow-up in a timely fashion (a couple > > of days) I have only two options: > > Again, you're misinterpreting my original reply. I don't think so at all. > > I thought send-pr was the way to "talk to" gnats officially... If not, ok, > > but then the original has to be comitted first before I can do this (as you > > noted below). > > But you can send replies to PR's by putting "Re: ports/<insert PR number>" as > the subject, and then using send-pr to reply if your mail has any sensitive > data (like tabs, which my MUA tends to convert to spaces), but else you can > just use your usual MUA to reply to PR issues. Gee, you're assuming I keep PR numbers around in some kind of database. I don't. I made a contribution; if the [Gods of FreeBSD Ports] don't want it, then fine - reject it and be done with it. If you do want it then commit it and be done with it. > > Any idea on a timeline when the "now original" commit can/will be done? > > I'm sure that it can be done as soon as you clear up your misunderstandings > with me. There are no misunderstandings here Will, and this little snit-like response of yours in that last line says EVERYTHING about what pisses me off on occasion (and has over the last several years) about the little band to which you belong. If you're not a committer, then don't reply and act like one. I'm not responsible for keeping an "annointed list" around my machine and checking off one or another box when I get a reply to something I send in. I refuse to do that - its simply not my place or position to do so. If you want to speak on behalf of that part of GNATS, then expect to be treated as if you have - you did, and were. A complaint rather than a "open->closed" reply says all that needs to be said. Holding a PR open without cause doesn't solve anything either. BLUNTLY: Someone who DOES have commit privs please make a decision on this submission. If you're going to reject the port then PLEASE SAY SO and I'll go on my way and update both my local repository storage (which I ALSO fixed to comply with your numbering systems and naming conventions) as well as the web page so people know what's going on! I can also terminate the way I have been maintaining the code for the last few days (which I happy to personally dislike, but will maintain for compatability reasons if this is going to be a port). If you're going to COMMIT the port then please do so, in that I'd like to know how I'm going to be maintaining the software from this point forward, and this decision on your part is germane - in fact, critical - to that process. I thought I'd do the community a favor and add something to the base of code that is available to run on FreeBSD from the "official" sources. I certainly didn't need to do so, and in fact there were some compromises that I had to make in order to do this, some of which will probably upset the rather sizeable base of EXISTING users of the software (in particular, the move of control and executable files will certainly be a "gotcha" for them at least once) If the port is unwanted as it stands then tell me so and that's fine - no harm done - the mistake certainly won't be made twice! Pardon me for "intruding" into your little treehouse on a new year...... Sheesh! -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@denninger.net) Web: http://childrens-justice.org Isn't it time we started putting KIDS first? See the above URL for a plan to do exactly that! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000101121727.A35145>