Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 20:47:40 -0500 (EST) From: Trevor Johnson <trevor@jpj.net> To: Steve Price <steve@havk.org> Cc: Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>, <will@physics.purdue.edu>, <ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/japanese/skkfep Makefile Message-ID: <20010322203353.L14012-100000@blues.jpj.net> In-Reply-To: <20010322004125.U43429@bsd.havk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> This port is no longer portlint(1) clean. The output of portlint isn't always the be-all and end-all (see http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=24651) but the Porters' Handbook says a MAINTAINER line is required: [maintainer; *mandatory*! This is the person (preferably with commit privileges) whom a user can contact for questions and bug reports - this person should be the porter or someone who can forward questions to the original porter reasonably promptly. If you really do not want to have your address here, set it to "ports@FreeBSD.org".] There are probably several hundred ports which follow this rule. IMO it is not an odious rule, and it's mostly being followed, so it would be simplest to change the few ports which have missing MAINTAINER lines, and any which have freebsd-ports as the maintainer (at last count, only this single port we're talking about--see http://people.freebsd.org/~fenner/portsurvey/freebsd-ports@freebsd.org.html) so they follow the rule. Unless someone objects and proposes to change the Handbook, I'll add skkfep's MAINTAINER line back, okay? -- Trevor Johnson http://jpj.net/~trevor/gpgkey.txt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010322203353.L14012-100000>