Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:26:03 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New port: NumlockX Message-ID: <20030930082603.GN11636@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> In-Reply-To: <20030929225945.GT47415@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <20030909152452.GC10815@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <1063121517.50301.24.camel@jake> <20030929104642.GA8813@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030929225945.GT47415@toxic.magnesium.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# adamw@FreeBSD.org / 2003-09-29 18:59:45 -0400: > >> (09.29.2003 @ 0646 PST): Jean-Baptiste Quenot said, in 0.9K: << > > I'm wondering why it always takes *ages* to change the ports tree. > > Either the committers are not interested, or they don't have spare time > > to handle such requests. > >> end of "Re: New port: NumlockX" from Jean-Baptiste Quenot << > > This is why: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports&state=open&responsible=freebsd-ports-bugs you're pointing at a problem and claiming that it's the cause of the problem. the huge number of unassigned port PRs is IMO result of FreeBSD having too few (active?) committers. the ports tree could use a lot more autonomous maintainers who don't have to beg or wait for long periods of time to have updates to their ports committed. don't the FreeBSD hacks to cvs(1) allow for ACL granularity to the directory level? (e. g. Alex Dupre could have commit in /usr/ports/databases/mysql[[:digit:]]+-(server|client)) -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030930082603.GN11636>