Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:57:55 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Florent Thoumie <flz@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/rdesktop pkg-plist Message-ID: <20050310235755.GB58785@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <42309B5B.7020201@FreeBSD.org> References: <200503101905.j2AJ5B6R013928@repoman.freebsd.org> <42309B5B.7020201@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 08:09:15PM +0100, Florent Thoumie wrote: > David E. O'Brien wrote: > >obrien 2005-03-10 19:05:11 UTC > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > Modified files: > > net/rdesktop pkg-plist > > Log: > > Sort the keymaps. > > > > Revision Changes Path > > 1.5 +32 -32 ports/net/rdesktop/pkg-plist > > This is your third commit to get rdesktop updated > in two days. Yes, the patch was a mess, I read what I could from it and updated the port. The maintainer is not a committer and I did not know the patch submitted wasn't the maintainer when I read it. The maintainer is not a committer and thus cannot update this port himself. I have seen no objections from him. Have we become so process oriented that we've become paralyzed?? Actually, yes we have. It boggles my mind where being a Ports Committer in 1995 under Satoshi has turned into. It boggles my mind that a comment fix to bsd.port.mk has to be run thru an experimental build. Yet portmgr can't address issues of port stealing? No portmgr replied to the thread when elk hijacked the 'bash' port from me. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050310235755.GB58785>