Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 11 Sep 2010 11:55:50 +0200
From:      Remko Lodder <remko@elvandar.org>
To:        Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/sysutils/nvclock/files patch-src::Makefile.in
Message-ID:  <74745E4D-B9A7-4ABC-A13C-6D6B4ECC1130@elvandar.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100911095133.GA98291@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201009110907.o8B97h9o041593@repoman.freebsd.org> <2FE6FEAD-AEC7-47B3-BF09-7058908F3D42@elvandar.org> <20100911095133.GA98291@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Sep 11, 2010, at 11:51 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:33:20AM +0200, Remko Lodder wrote:
>> On Sep 11, 2010, at 11:07 AM, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>>> 
>>> Closes PR:      ports/149434
>> 
>> We refer to this as
>> 
>> PR:	<category>/<number>
> 
> In most cases, yes, absolutely, but:
> 
> The committed patch was not from the PR; submitter suggested marking the
> port as jobs-unsafe (and I hate marking ports unsafe or broken instead of
> properly fixing them).  Technically, I could have omitted any attribution
> whatsoever, but decided to do it nonetheless (making clear that commit
> merely closes the PR, not taking any code/idea from it).  Thanks for
> asking though.
> 
> ./danfe

no, when refering to a PR we always do that.

We can tell in the changelog itself that the PR had not been used itself.


-- 
/"\   Best regards,                        | remko@FreeBSD.org
\ /   Remko Lodder                      | remko@EFnet
X    http://www.evilcoder.org/    |
/ \   ASCII Ribbon Campaign    | Against HTML Mail and News




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?74745E4D-B9A7-4ABC-A13C-6D6B4ECC1130>