Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:28:51 -0600 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm unsubscribing Message-ID: <52B348F3.8020407@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <52B3474A.7090803@marino.st> References: <52B0D149.5020308@marino.st> <52B343FE.4070808@FreeBSD.org> <52B3474A.7090803@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --5MhHpBJ9baLUMhpfiBFnS88Q09wwVdRLc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/19/2013 1:21 PM, John Marino wrote: > On 12/19/2013 20:07, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> >> I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept >> their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has >> build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@ shouldn= 't >> either. It tells everyone that "yes" there is a problem with this port= >> and "it's not just me". >=20 >=20 > What can I say? I think pasting an error log, and only an error log, i= s > "quite rude". But I'm also serious -- if this is the official response= > (and seeing that you are a member of portmgr, that makes it pretty clos= e > to official), then I'll follow through and simply unsubscribe from the > list. If FreeBSD isn't going to enforce their own procedures and use o= f > infrastructure, I will limit my exposure to the continuing anarchy and > let "customer service" to those that agree that ports@ is a free-for-al= l. >=20 > John >=20 I didn't say I spoke for portmgr. I just don't see the big deal and it's odd that it's OK on 1 list but not another. It's anti-user to get mad at them for trying to get help or report it for others. Of course we prefer they use GNATS, but go look in there and you'll see it grows every day upward. ports@ is a community that more people read than freebsd-ports-bugs and are more likely to get help and discuss how they fixed the issue. We are a mailing-list driven organization after all. IMHO threatening to unsubscribe for users trying to get help is not appropriate. --=20 Regards, Bryan Drewery --5MhHpBJ9baLUMhpfiBFnS88Q09wwVdRLc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSs0jzAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPcdUIAIHgGR+rMW32VZGEyVfxoHEI cgbEYFl0MRbhLW+nWDlx4nIGX2XzjuXjvL7H9brbmZqWCqwXWBb3pbs0WwoapWoh d64GcMF6H3JP0muEJ3AFL1h/netau+Jak0xjIPq1TL55q+h4AwXwfv2wE8sl/Cnd cLgjtGLuwl/H7O0U+OBzzZHF6vjPYgzlK+7jz/Y8xw9/QonnIdNtNaAjmnJc5Uf4 Fo18eoOtQzv34Q2WBentVFqxTzWM59RBOTdXFhEvYJ+/12Gn7ihhDNHUZqEI3anC u9w6pYf8/EHlo4xlORxWMBfrtXRghZgtb7fbGOmtmoCif/kdwoqp024gKlJm1dA= =g3gr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5MhHpBJ9baLUMhpfiBFnS88Q09wwVdRLc--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52B348F3.8020407>