Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Apr 2000 12:50:38 -0300
From:      lioux@uol.com.br
To:        Jay Krell <jay.krell@cornell.edu>
Cc:        ade@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ports/15481: ports/devel/codecrusader slightly broken
Message-ID:  <20000402125038.B20347@Fedaykin.here>
In-Reply-To: <006b01bf9c50$6715c560$0201a8c0@jayk_home4nt>; from jay.krell@cornell.edu on Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 07:06:07PM -0800
References:  <006b01bf9c50$6715c560$0201a8c0@jayk_home4nt>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 01, 2000 at 07:06:07PM -0800, Jay Krell wrote:
> 
> >However, I'd rather send
> >in full patches later on and take over if its okay with the maintainer.
> 
> The patches should probably be sent to the original author besides just the
> port maintainer. That should probably be the case for all ports in case it's
> a real bug or the author is willing to maintain an #ifdef __FreeBSD__ or
> #ifdef __BSD__ or #ifdef __unix__ or whatever the case may be..

I totally agree. However, I think that sending patches to original author should
be handled preferebly by the original maintainer, for he/she is the one who knows
what will get in/out of /patches.

That's what I do for the few ports I maintain. I always try to coordinate
all changes with the authors. At least, when they are willing to cooperate.
:)

--
regards, mferreira


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000402125038.B20347>