Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 20:37:19 -0500 From: "Jeremy Messenger" <mezz7@cox.net> To: "Mark Linimon" <linimon@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/Mk bsd.autotools.mk ports/devel/libtool15 Makefile Message-ID: <op.tptqshan9aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> In-Reply-To: <200703270123.l2R1NvPx014922@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <200703270123.l2R1NvPx014922@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 20:23:57 -0500, Mark Linimon <linimon@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > linimon 2007-03-27 01:23:57 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository > > Modified files: > Mk bsd.autotools.mk > devel/libtool15 Makefile > Log: > I do not appreciate the attempt to play politics with the reassignment > of > maintainership of these two files. I insist that further commits be > run > through portmgr@ first. ports@? Why not portmgr@ or back to ade@ in the MAINTAINER? Reduce the confuse of practice for ports@ is unmaintain and is open for anyone to poke it. Cheers, Mezz > Hat: portmgr -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team - FreeBSD Multimedia Hat (ports, not src) http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org http://wiki.freebsd.org/multimedia - multimedia@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.tptqshan9aq2h7>