Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:23:10 +0100 From: John Marino <dragonflybsd@marino.st> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Philippe_Aud=E9oud?= <jadawin@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Rene Ladan <rene@FreeBSD.org>, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r335281 - in head: . audio audio/gnump3d Message-ID: <529D94EE.9060609@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <20131203080830.GA77731@tuxaco.net> References: <20131202104324.GB71618@tuxaco.net> <529C689B.9050902@marino.st> <20131202131244.GC71618@tuxaco.net> <529C8C1F.7050802@marino.st> <20131202134921.GD71618@tuxaco.net> <529C91F2.6020004@marino.st> <20131202145224.GH71618@tuxaco.net> <529CA16C.2060000@marino.st> <20131202184749.GC30485@lonesome.com> <20131203015955.GA55963@apnoea.adamw.org> <20131203080830.GA77731@tuxaco.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/3/2013 09:08, Philippe Audéoud wrote: > > Adam, > > I don't care about "mine" port... I'm just saying that Philippe, You've denied several times that you don't care about your port, but your actions yesterday clearly state otherwise. It's fine because it serves as an example. > I'm just saying that > nothing is clear around maintainer and that if maintainer is set, it > have to be respected. THIS! This is exactly the point. You've come to understand that the listed maintainer is a complete monopoly and it is this concept to which we object. I would argue that maintainer has been respected, but you clearly feel otherwise. > I agree that we need to be more reactive to fix a mistake > but rules don't have to be too permissive regards to maintainer respect. Fixing a typo or obvious error is not a sign of disrespect. In most cases, the maintainer should actually be grateful that the port was restored quicker than he/she would have done it. > Clearly, nothing to see with "People need to un-knot their panties". > Serioulsy. Actually, it was quite appropriate. That's exactly how I see it too. > Now, that everybody gave his opinion about panties, playground and other > off topic remarks, can we have a *debate* on how we can write or update > current rules about maintainer and each committer relation, please ? > Obviously it's a problem encountered by many committer and it have to be > fixed. Or are we only good to troll ? I'm leery about this. On another thread I've seen the first suggestion and I don't like where it's headed. Again, I think portmgr should be proactive about this and not wait for "suggestions". The problem is clear, this is not new. I consider this part of the responsibility of the portmgr -- to update policy as needed and clearly the current policy is not satisfactory. The portmgr is made up of smart guys, surely they can update policy without a circus of a debate. > I suggest to work with marino@ and rene@ to help portmgr@ and bapt@ ask it too. > So, if you want to be constructive (more than talking about panties, I mean), > feel free to send me an email and i will put you in the "workshop". I'm happy to "review" any proposed policy change from portmgr and provide feedback. I really don't want to get into a "debate" though. I think the issues are pretty well defined, so I trust the solution would be straightforward. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?529D94EE.9060609>