From owner-cvs-all Sun Apr 12 22:50:44 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA10918 for cvs-all-outgoing; Sun, 12 Apr 1998 22:50:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA10893; Sun, 12 Apr 1998 22:50:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA05672; Sun, 12 Apr 1998 22:50:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com) To: Nate Williams cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: PRs in suspended state In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 12 Apr 1998 19:26:55 MDT." <199804130126.TAA27099@mt.sri.com> Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1998 22:50:42 -0700 Message-ID: <5668.892446642@time.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk > This seems silly to me, and makes us look even less professional. There > is no difference between 'open' and 'suspended' at all. Putting a PR in > suspended state is essentially the same as deleting it. I have to actually concur with this. There is *nobody* who's going to find the time or inclination to go back and look at a "suspended" PR, myself first and foremost, and these PRs should either be closed when it's clear they're dead or left open and a query sent to the original submitter. That's basically the approach taken by our PR meister. Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message