From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Fri Apr 1 08:56:45 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@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 29DEDAE3FAD; Fri, 1 Apr 2016 08:56:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x229.google.com (mail-lf0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B05C812CD; Fri, 1 Apr 2016 08:56:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-x229.google.com with SMTP id k79so77098603lfb.2; Fri, 01 Apr 2016 01:56:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=Na8qboHWqagKvlNFIGLgS9Wm/F2yRC/vzKFUE7Swt+Q=; b=Hdl/0lMMmuptn2Z5VsdfcloVYM8aBXQUdt+8DYT58SjnU4WOWZxarbaKR7hc58ZZTU LYa0DRenvmmW1T+iUACdbaV3+Xd20PeNlt8WasYAWSyE3svkd9wsT2DTp/wgPwglKMjt sAESNTIkMluri+RXes5cFOaDV9OO4raXoLUkWw0qMWFK4YVCmZHVwnQ6yc8w9GmDXSzy A5rWCHj+guy2AadvxsA62drlKUL0g+fNielqdTMlPlqhulEiF4rhbP8jzXHEJj0CE6x1 EdOrRaVNM2stxPNoI/V0cKtCm1DiyHDTiE6PJMWtd/Wx827ewgInucCjIli0bAD+eeSz uvZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=Na8qboHWqagKvlNFIGLgS9Wm/F2yRC/vzKFUE7Swt+Q=; b=UAdVF2Rml7eC5Nb9LOez+yN+rjGWz37tKtRkYz2F2svHhrwlHEGV6tVkLyGyDq2k+o Ah+8bkDtiT4poRDVanyQd1TVCCRoslJe+Z4cp+UmxyHkZdDXECqlI5TctXeXNRrs13Qn Un004F0AzqTfzqj7a0CFzWlC/kLu8ENzDkbmOLx0CRoeHRr5/mGE+eA0GEUddI5PAT5d L5W2OsF1OIUXaXVA/hq5+EkrzeENcH4nUsRJPLWmPsiqtKxMd/sFarcvUEH/kyeT5mWX 1Z9Q/mye8Y0qKYZ+wP5/B9EV6eLhd8HFFGDUmhXgxriXZHSUlGXHAqojIBQw6DIt761Z qAiQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIUB+tEPxGKTH+G01M0LOETqIfrVFJ5wAt7fXlbCb6G4UxlYW4jNbh6l65lyGawBoj05VCfwf61mPnGCA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.25.28.80 with SMTP id c77mr3213133lfc.5.1459501002944; Fri, 01 Apr 2016 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT) Sender: thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com Received: by 10.25.213.65 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Apr 2016 01:56:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7485ef18e1261c87b17a9c23da01259a@secure.marino.st> References: <201603312004.u2VK4n5n028013@repo.freebsd.org> <7485ef18e1261c87b17a9c23da01259a@secure.marino.st> Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 10:56:42 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: nmYzj9Zcq7o66r07ChljgSLRpeg Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r412296 - head/lang/rust From: Thomas Zander To: John Marino Cc: Jan Beich , "ports-committers@FreeBSD.org" , svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:56:45 -0000 John, On 1 April 2016 at 10:01, John Marino (FreeBSD) wrote: > It's been addressed by portmgr. > You are not expected to test fixes on DragonFly, but at the same time you > aren't supposed to intentionally break existing DF support. I am allowed to > restore builds on DF when updates break them. Of course I would not intentionally break DF support. That would be stupid. > Why would you take offense that Jan is doing a big service for DF? It > doesn't affect you at all or add any new obligations. Please don't twist my words. I did not take offense at Jan (in fact, I started the mail with a compliment regarding his work) and I also did not take offense at anybody doing a service for DF. I said this does not fix a problem with the port, but it does introduce a new feature, and the maintainer should be in the loop before it is committed. Because at the end of the day the maintainer is responsible for supporting a feature and receives the blame if something breaks. > The home of patches are mixed. If the patches have benefits to FreeBSD (say > to support gcc compiler) then they move to ports. If they conflict with > FreeBSD somehow, then they stay in dports. Exactly this is my point: This commit does not a have a benefit to FreeBSD. It adds *only* DF-specifics. Therefore my instincts tell me this should be part of dports, and I would have appreciated this discussion before the commit, not after the fact. That's all. And since the fix-it-blanket is not clear enough in all cases (obviously Jan and me came to different conclusions whether this one is a fix), it would be good to have a word from portmgr whether something like this is part of it or not. Because for sure there are/will be more PRs with a similar intention. Best regards Riggs