From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 26 15:47:48 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFC616A4CE
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:47:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.ciam.ru (mail.ciam.ru [213.147.57.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 556AF43D1D
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2004 15:47:47 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from sem@ciam.ru)
Received: from avim.ciam.ru ([192.168.1.3])
	by mail.ciam.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.x)
	id 1B713C-00033Q-5t; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 02:47:46 +0300
Received: from sem (helo=localhost)
	by avim.ciam.ru with local-esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD)
	id 1B713C-00067B-4i; Sat, 27 Mar 2004 02:47:46 +0300
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 02:47:46 +0300 (MSK)
From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru>
To: Will Andrews <will@csociety.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040326232205.GD57192@sirius.firepipe.net>
Message-ID: <20040327022929.B22129@avim.ciam.ru>
References: <opr5eiuf0f8ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net>
	<c3uoks$193u$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
	<4062FF7A.2040509@ciam.ru> <c3v3kn$1drs$1@kemoauc.mips.inka.de>
	<20040326232205.GD57192@sirius.firepipe.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Sign your name in pkg-descr is useless or useful?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 23:47:48 -0000

> The reason I suggested the first syntax is so just the email
> address could be simply parsed.

IMHO Email address could be simply parsed any way.
Regexp not so difficult for it:
[A-Za-z0-9_-]+@[A-Za-z0-9-]+(\.[A-Za-z0-9-]+)*\.[A-Za-z]+
it could be more complex of course for more strict errors chechking.

--
Sem.