Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 02:35:54 -0500 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler <eadler@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/ZendOptimizer pkg-descr ports/audio/abcmidi pkg-descr ports/astro/accrete pkg-descr ports/devel/adabooch pkg-descr ports/databases/aolserver-nsmysql pkg-descr ports/archivers/aolserver-nszlib pkg-descr ports/comms/aprsd ... Message-ID: <20111024073554.GD10513@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20111023202044.5e05632c.stas@FreeBSD.org> References: <201110222350.p9MNoNPP081796@repoman.freebsd.org> <20111023202044.5e05632c.stas@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 08:20:44PM -0700, Stanislav Sedov wrote: > It's also a good gesture to inform a maintainer of the port of the > planned changes ask for his/her agreement True ... but in the cases like this which would require hundreds of approval emails, it's not very feasible. > Getting the mentor and portmgr@ approval is obviously not enough for > that kind of changes, there should've been a community consensus on > this first [...] (even portmgr@ is not authorized to make that kind > of changes unless they're fixing the broken thing). If you read the portmgr charter, we've been given a lot of leeway. core@ felt that when writing the document that "go fix it" outweighed many other considerations. Frankly, I'm kind of surprised that this change was controversial; to me, it seemed somewhat mechanical. For cases where functionality changes, I could see it. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111024073554.GD10513>