Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:40:36 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru> To: Paul Schmehl <pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com> Cc: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Migration to new SourceForge url scheme now inevitable, solution Message-ID: <20090820164036.GA12998@hades.panopticon> In-Reply-To: <6B974976DD234EF08949F6A8@utd65257.utdallas.edu> References: <20090820023314.GF1295@hades.panopticon> <4A8CCC24.8050605@p6m7g8.com> <6B974976DD234EF08949F6A8@utd65257.utdallas.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Paul Schmehl (pschmehl_lists@tx.rr.com) wrote: > I've been following this discussion closely since several of my ports fetch > from Sourceforge. Is it safe to assume that some global solution will be > applied to the ports tree? Or are we maintainers going to need to submit PRs > for affected ports once a solution is agreed upon? This should be done globally, or else we'll end up with 90% unfetchable SF ports for 8.0 release. I'm preparing the patch currently. -- Dmitry Marakasov . 55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56 9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D amdmi3@amdmi3.ru ..: jabber: amdmi3@jabber.ru http://www.amdmi3.ru
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090820164036.GA12998>