From owner-freebsd-perl@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 19 00:31:01 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B50C016A4CE; Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:31:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA19043D1F; Fri, 19 Dec 2003 00:31:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from lonesome.com (cs242719-195.austin.rr.com [24.27.19.195]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38B701437B; Fri, 19 Dec 2003 02:31:00 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3FE2B724.9060902@lonesome.com> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 02:30:28 -0600 From: Mark Linimon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030713 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kirill Ponomarew References: <200312190805.hBJ85pPL021711@repoman.freebsd.org> <63476156.1071825145@sauron.in.mat.cc> <20031219081604.GH90871@voodoo.oberon.net> In-Reply-To: <20031219081604.GH90871@voodoo.oberon.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Mathieu Arnold cc: ports@FreeBSD.org cc: perl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/p5-Mail-SpamAssassin Makefile distinfo X-BeenThere: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: maintainer of a number of perl-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 08:31:01 -0000 > > >Maybe it's better to move all p5-* ports which are maintained >by ports@FreeBSD.org to perl@FreeBSD.org ? > > Please don't do this. In addition to the repo churn, there are many places in the FreeBSD documentation that state that "ports@" is the canonical stand-in value for "unmaintained". This would violate POLA IMHO. I believe that my ports monitoring code and Bill Fenner's distfile survey parsers would also have to be reworked. I don't know about the FreshPorts code but I wouldn't be surprised. mcl