From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 26 23:05:30 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id DE4C916A476; Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:05:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:05:30 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Pav Lucistnik Message-ID: <20071026230530.GA57346@FreeBSD.org> References: <1193261223.93212.15.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20071026155223.GB7312@FreeBSD.org> <1193419761.21743.6.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1193419761.21743.6.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Jeremy Messenger , Joe Marcus Clarke Subject: Re: HEADS UP: GNOME 2.20 is being merged X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:05:31 -0000 On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 07:29:21PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > Alexey Dokuchaev p??e v p? 26. 10. 2007 v 15:52 +0000: > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2007 at 03:27:58PM -0500, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > > > Before anyone ask about why not test in pointyhat first. We did, but > > > pointyhat has stability problems so it has missed some ports. We had to go > > > ahead put in FreeBSD ports tree and we will be working on from there and > > > we also will be keeping our eyes on pointyhat logs. > > > > I'm worried about PF date coming too soon. Maybe we should extend it > > (say, for a week) so Gnome-related problems can get fixed before the > > deadline? > > And what is the freeze designed for other than fixing port problems? I believe I've seen PF date extended in the past for exactly the same reason. If I'm mistaken, please accept my apologies, and let's move on! ./danfe