From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Mar 22 14:17:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (H-135-207-30-103.research.att.com [135.207.30.103]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ABD37B71C for ; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 14:17:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from fenner@research.att.com) Received: from alliance.research.att.com (alliance.research.att.com [135.207.26.26]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45A521E01F; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:17:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from windsor.research.att.com (windsor.research.att.com [135.207.26.46]) by alliance.research.att.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA02161; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:17:46 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Fenner Received: (from fenner@localhost) by windsor.research.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.5) id QAA12259; Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:17:45 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <200103222217.QAA12259@windsor.research.att.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII To: steve@havk.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/japanese/skkfep Makefile Cc: ports@freebsd.org References: <200103212026.f2LKQ2d15684@freefall.freebsd.org> <20010321180600.N469@ohm.physics.purdue.edu> <200103220627.AAA12181@windsor.research.att.com> <20010322004125.U43429@bsd.havk.org> <200103222138.PAA04691@windsor.research.att.com> <20010322155336.U97160@bsd.havk.org> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:17:44 -0600 Versions: dmail (solaris) 2.2g/makemail 2.9a Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The reason I prefer the implicit no MAINTAINER line is because it's harder to have a single value if each port has it in it (e.g. the whole reason this came up was that this port had MAINTAINER=freebsd-ports@freebsd.org). The value of having a single "no maintainer" value is that the distfile and bento surveys can have a single list of ports with no MAINTAINER (e.g. http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/portsurvey/ports@freebsd.org.html or http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/errorlogs/ports@freebsd.org.html ). I feel strongly about it being consistent; I don't feel strongly about presence of MAINTAINER=ports@freebsd.org vs. no MAINTAINER line. I think it's easier to be consistent if you let bsd.port.mk be consistent, but if the community is willing to help keep things consistent then I don't mind keeping the line in there. If I'm the only one enforcing consistency, then I'll continue to tend towards removing them. Bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message