From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mon Jun 27 20:21:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857FFB84D11 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:21:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@komquats.com) Received: from smtp-out-so.shaw.ca (smtp-out-so.shaw.ca [64.59.136.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A0E4277C; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:21:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@komquats.com) Received: from spqr.komquats.com ([96.50.22.10]) by shaw.ca with SMTP id Hd2Db57JLBLFmHd2EbiUZK; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 14:21:37 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=W5d6blek c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=jvE2nwUzI0ECrNeyr98KWA==:117 a=jvE2nwUzI0ECrNeyr98KWA==:17 a=L9H7d07YOLsA:10 a=9cW_t1CCXrUA:10 a=s5jvgZ67dGcA:10 a=pD_ry4oyNxEA:10 a=5noeBbRCAAAA:8 a=YxBL1-UpAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=jKalHx2oKn8LmRi9RhoA:9 a=pILoi4Qadgk23tj5ZfSS:22 a=Ia-lj3WSrqcvXOmTRaiG:22 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 Received: from slippy.cwsent.com (slippy [10.1.1.91]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E81AB13752; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:21:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slippy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slippy.cwsent.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u5RKLVhQ057899; Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:21:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com) Message-Id: <201606272021.u5RKLVhQ057899@slippy.cwsent.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.6 Reply-to: Cy Schubert From: Cy Schubert X-os: FreeBSD X-Sender: cy@cwsent.com X-URL: http://www.cschubert.com/ To: Michelle Sullivan cc: koobs@FreeBSD.org, Adam Weinberger , araujo@freebsd.org, Matthias Andree , marino@freebsd.org, ports-committers , Mathieu Arnold , freebsd-ports , FreeBSD Ports Management Team , Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh Subject: Re: blanket portmgr approval vs. non-fixing changes In-Reply-To: Message from Michelle Sullivan of "Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:16:41 +0200." <57716D89.1050108@sorbs.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 13:21:31 -0700 X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfN6SNQTCNdE5TZpfoNMs+QWz4iJ2uZymbnOh2AxUVfskAJUA+JtKSF3KRV3BsKn1I6WZJ9Ki3CsFDTrH/fYc6QqG0vatebE1XGPP63lJ1P0zX2VHX3XP ZaQhuQOvR3T3zepbjZIGdrFT3XsHnQhyQjy7mhFbFmVLPtKaOZCWSLrUsqX46WOtshP9AFAem3FB2VfxyYUBGbYiSW3cAr+HN++fEiq3oZ0/B5DD0lxl16uW 2+MQtcQQeBjwiimJylJY2QLhQciOKa8LHg5LAfTD7nKignrFC3esfi0XBWPZmCfviB0+A9Pz36arFgwXhLoeq0512E/qkKJh2OPxI6CgBC8NPevSzg9OuCwf Ou6yFAwmt57qKQPXOHhOeokQIaGHzZiaX9UtWwn9VXDkOaFAFQ4m4DoOLT3lSgja+HT8f3ynO5VMiOtLiKoPp1Q49gxMn6fzFDaNqffOluHxHE4VSrD3ELiy BcB/xNgjh/9ZbsTniWr3LHFPl1kt4d2s903ksA== X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 21:17:26 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:21:39 -0000 In message <57716D89.1050108@sorbs.net>, Michelle Sullivan writes: > Kubilay Kocak wrote: > > > > All: How did you feel the first time you saw your email on a maintainer > > line? That is priceless and shouldn't be confused with the 'bad' kind of > > ownership. > > > > Don't forget that many people see their name/email in the maintainer > line as being responsible for the port.. so someone goes makes blanket > changes which actually breaks stuff.. that reflects on the person in the > Maintainer line - whether you want it to do so or not, whether you > believe it or not.. I think it's more than the maintainer perceives that they're responsible. Getting that email from freebsd-pkg-fallout I think there was and maybe still is a general impression that is had. I for one take the attitude, you break it, you fix it and I don't hesitate to email any committer who made a blanket change that broke something. It's only fair because fixing breakage caused by others also takes away from other productive work and projects, as some of us do have time constraints and time pressure due to other commitments. I have no problems with blanket approval as long as everyone understands the rules of engagement. I think the maintainer has final say on version updates and general structure such as supported options or anything that adds additional support requirements. For example, someone submits a PR to add option X. Adding option X should require maintainer approval whereas implementation of options helpers shouldn't require maintainer approval (but if anything breaks, the committer breaking the port should fix it). Anything else should be fair game. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert FreeBSD UNIX: Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.