Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 19:33:23 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/led Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/editors/led/files patch-Makefile.in Message-ID: <3B1FACD3.DF31682@FreeBSD.org> References: <200106070926.f579QqU16744@freefall.freebsd.org> <20010607071406.Y81224@bohr.physics.purdue.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Will Andrews wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:26:52AM -0700, Maxim Sobolev (sobomax@FreeBSD.org) wrote: > > Added files: > > editors/led/files patch-Makefile.in > > Log: > > - Pass over maintainership to Jordan DeLong <fracture@allusion.net> - he is > > author of the led, so would be a best MAINTAINER for it; > > Adding patches when the author could easily integrate them into > his source tree and roll a release at some point is bad form. > > Personally, I'd like to see it made a rule that whenever > reasonably possible, people must get patches merged into the > upstream before a commit is made, rather than after, with some > obvious exceptions (e.g. FreeBSD release close by, author(s) have > shown ignorance in the past, or high demand for patch etc.). I do not see a reason for such a strict requirement here. People want features today, not N days from now (for most packages release rolling is not a very quick process). I think that our repo is able to bear the costs involved, especially considering that ports Attics are being emptied regularly, so there is no cumulative effect. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B1FACD3.DF31682>