From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Dec 19 22:55:40 2002 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 449F137B401 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:55:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from net2.dinoex.sub.org (net2.dinoex.de [212.184.201.182]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D044D43EE5 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2002 22:55:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org) Received: from net2.dinoex.sub.org (dinoex@net2.dinoex.de [212.184.201.182]) by net2.dinoex.sub.org (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBK6t5gw013899 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:55:07 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org) X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: X-Authentication-Warning: net2.dinoex.sub.org: Host dinoex@net2.dinoex.de [212.184.201.182] claimed to be net2.dinoex.sub.org Received: from gate.dinoex.sub.org (dinoex@localhost) by net2.dinoex.sub.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) with BSMTP id gBK6t3Nb013887 for ; Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:55:03 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org) To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Message-ID: From: dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org (Dirk Meyer) Organization: privat Subject: Re: Thoughts about ports freeze Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 07:51:48 +0100 X-Mailer: Dinoex 1.79 References: <20021220001529.GC9963@vega.vega.com> X-Gateway: ZCONNECT gate.dinoex.sub.org [UNIX/Connect 0.94] X-Accept-Language: de,en X-PGP-Fingerprint: 44 16 EC 0A D3 3A 4F 28 8A 8A 47 93 F1 CF 2F 12 X-Noad: Please don't send me ad's by mail. I'm bored by this type of mail. X-Copyright: (C) Copyright 2001 by Dirk Meyer -- All rights reserved. X-Note: sending SPAM is a violation of both german and US law and will at least trigger a complaint at your provider's postmaster. X-PGP-Key-Avail: mailto:pgp-public-keys@keys.de.pgp.net Subject:GET 0x331CDA5D X-No-Archive: yes X-ZC-VIA: 20021220000000W+1@dinoex.sub.org Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Maxim Sobolev wrote, > Perhaps we could just branch out current state of the tree and unlock > it for normal use, while allow to commit onto the RE branch only after > getting portmgr's approval. Why just simply "tag" the tree? Retag the fixes needed for CURRENT on portmgr@ approval? Moving the tags can give us fine control withouth having to branch or freeze. I have 29 updates/committs in the queue, waiting for the freeze is over. Due to serveral request by users, I put thm online: http://people.freebsd.org/~dinoex/ports/ No offense, I know the problems, but I think the freeze is way to long. kind regards Dirk - Dirk Meyer, Im Grund 4, 34317 Habichtswald, Germany - [dirk.meyer@dinoex.sub.org],[dirk.meyer@guug.de],[dinoex@FreeBSD.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message