Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 25 May 2012 09:13:15 +0800
From:      Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com>
To:        Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org>, miwi@freebsd.org, araujo@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, Dmitry Sivachenko <demon@freebsd.org>, cvs-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/net/haproxy Makefile distinfo
Message-ID:  <CAOfEmZjV3d4O2LTsJTLM9kh97QcRGx9RokEDz-YGxb5wSz6Pdg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgkvwf5MGLsTVfksO-vQoc4OK9x094SDUHXWkDWoedCO_g@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201205210632.q4L6WPI9081702@repoman.freebsd.org> <20120521143623.34087c13.miwi@FreeBSD.org> <4FB9E411.9030500@FreeBSD.org> <20120521070444.GG63744@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <CAOfEmZgqf_F-FuYE2t_5bhjcQB-roGYO8LCuX6yynh_oieBtww@mail.gmail.com> <CAF6rxgkvwf5MGLsTVfksO-vQoc4OK9x094SDUHXWkDWoedCO_g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
No, is not necessary ask portmgr or secteam to approve if it is a security
update.
On May 24, 2012 1:21 AM, "Eitan Adler" <eadler@freebsd.org> wrote:

> On 21 May 2012 00:09, Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just to let more clear the reason there is no maintainer approval.
> > However, if there is some security thing related with the update, I
> believe
> > isn't necessary the maintainer approval.
>
> portmgr or secteam still needs to approve.
>
>
> --
> Eitan Adler
> Source & Ports committer
> X11, Bugbusting teams
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOfEmZjV3d4O2LTsJTLM9kh97QcRGx9RokEDz-YGxb5wSz6Pdg>