Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2000 10:48:03 -0400 From: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM> To: Robert Withrow <bwithrow@BayNetworks.COM> Cc: Will Andrews <andrews@TECHNOLOGIST.COM>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, markm@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: exmh-2.1.1 port doesn't work with nmh Message-ID: <20000414104803.D19141@argon.blackdawn.com> In-Reply-To: <200004141347.JAA27238@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM>; from bwithrow@BayNetworks.COM on Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 09:44:49AM -0400 References: <andrews@technologist.com> <200004141347.JAA27238@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 at 09:44:49AM -0400, Robert Withrow wrote: > If you mean redundant because they are also PRs, it is because, > in the past, there has occationally been a significant delay > between the submission of the pr and the fixing of the port. > I was hoping to spare a port user the effort of re-fixing the same > problem (by having a solution appear *both* in the mailing list > archives and the pr database) in the interim. Since I mention Well, this must mean you're not on the ports list, because all PRs that are ports problems get sent to -ports. So if your PR states the name of a port and someone is interested in the port (and is on the list), they will probably look at your PR and fix it in their own copy, if they care enough. I suspected this was why you were sending them to both lists. :) No harm, I know you meant good. :) > pr number in the mail message there should be no confusion. [I > just went and checked the open ports pr's and while the list is quite > small (way to go guys!), still about 1/2 of them are more than Yes.. I and a few other people have been cleaning up the PR database for some time now, and I think we've eliminated a number of very old (say two or three years) PRs. This will continue to shrink in the near future. By the end of May, the ports' list should be down to less than 100. I have a few bookmarked `feedback' that I'm going to close very soon. :> > 30 days old. Also, in the case of this specific patch, I > sent it to the port maintainer about 6 weeks ago, and the > fix never got integrated, leading me to belive that something > got lost. So I opted for this belt-and-suspenders approach.] > > But, if a lot of people on the list don't like this, I won't > do it. No, I'm sure some people like it, it's just that if you submit a PR, it already gets fwd'd to the ports list. Anyway, since you mention that the maintainers never replied to your patches in reasonable time, I will commit them to the tree now. Thanks for your help. -- Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? 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?20000414104803.D19141>