Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:21:36 +0100 From: Thierry Thomas <thierry@pompo.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ability for maintainers to update own ports Message-ID: <20031111202136.GA40106@graf.pompo.net> In-Reply-To: <73E9F604-1472-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com> References: <1068458390.38101.19.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110152000.622db381.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <1068471598.38101.77.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110163623.GC93583@procyon.firepipe.net> <1068495958.690.72.camel@leguin> <53EC784E-13C5-11D8-AD24-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <3FB00E53.8060603@fillmore-labs.com> <20031111021929.GA17050@xor.obsecurity.org> <73E9F604-1472-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Le Mar 11 nov 03 à 19:11:21 +0100, Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> écrivait : > Branching the ports collection is not a helpful solution to the problem > of speeding up the rate at which ports are committed. I agree: we don't need branching. The GNATS PR database may be used as a kind of "untested" branch. It's already possible to search for a port from <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?query>, to grab the shar files or the patches, to test them, and then to report the results of these tests. A reviewed PR might be committed faster. -- Th. Thomas.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031111202136.GA40106>