Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 07 Feb 2014 16:32:23 +0100
From:      Benjamin Podszun <dar@darklajid.de>
To:        <ports@freebsd.org>
Cc:        marino@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: security/luasec needs bump to 0.5 - but there's no direct =?iso-8859-1?Q?maintainer=3F?=
Message-ID:  <af0857a0-e4de-44d7-96ca-129a197ca4db@darklajid.de>
In-Reply-To: <52F4E5E4.7020407@marino.st>
References:  <da044364-0e2f-49de-999f-2f6779b10055@darklajid.de> <52F4E5E4.7020407@marino.st>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, February 7, 2014 2:55:48 PM CEST, John Marino wrote:
> On 2/7/2014 14:43, Benjamin Podszun wrote:
>> Hi.
>>=20
>> Change of mail address, new thread with a decent title (previously:
>> prosody update, which is sort of independent as far as I've confirmed so
>> far).
>>=20
>> With the attached patch luasec-0.5 builds & installs fine in my
>  ...
>
> Hi Ben,
> One approach is to submit this patch as a PR but add a change to make
> the yourself the maintainer!  Then you're coming from a position of
> authority that the port needs bumping.  :)

Thanks. I submitted ports/186533 just now. I hope the discussion will=20
continue over there. Given that you're one of the guys with the freebsd.org=20=

tag: So what are the next steps? Someone's hopefully going to chime in,=20
look into that PR and (if it seems acceptable) commits that patch? Just=20
works=E2=84=A2 from here on?

> seriously, why not?

While I offered to adopt the port in the PR, the answer to that one is=20
easy:
I'm running a FreeBSD machine for less than 24h so far (if we ignore=20
playing with it > 6-8 years ago) and I'm not sure if I should change a=20
maintainer field _just yet_.. ;)

Ben



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?af0857a0-e4de-44d7-96ca-129a197ca4db>