Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 20:14:07 -0700 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: gnome@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: irc/xchat: limit icon blinking time Message-ID: <CAF6rxgneJR0ObpPTnX0EX7T82cbYRA5gq_66_qYAeqOaQqUQGw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4FE518FB.1000802@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FE2315C.50706@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxg=W=QhJ0%2BLJ_pudZmJo5yTWoWQj77NWKjWXx1sP1pLzbw@mail.gmail.com> <4FE2F673.2080201@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxgme9QoKKrictteBaipGKDq5ZTycL9d6_f2X4XVYNgyQFQ@mail.gmail.com> <4FE518FB.1000802@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 22 June 2012 18:16, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> wrote: > I'm not sure where you got that idea. Historically it's been pretty > common for there to be a version of something in ports where upstream > development has stalled (or outright died), but an active maintainer > keeps the thing alive with patches. Requiring a maintainer to do what > you're suggesting seems a very high, and altogether unnecessary burden. I don't oppose build patches for FreeBSD when the program otherwise works, but the ports collection is not a software development repository. -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgneJR0ObpPTnX0EX7T82cbYRA5gq_66_qYAeqOaQqUQGw>