From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Jul 27 14:45:29 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA16817 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:45:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from localhost.my.domain (ppp6587.on.bellglobal.com [206.172.208.179]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA16685 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 1998 14:44:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ac199@hwcn.org) Received: from localhost (tim@localhost) by localhost.my.domain (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA03956; Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:43:01 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ac199@hwcn.org) X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.my.domain: tim owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 17:43:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek X-Sender: tim@localhost Reply-To: ac199@hwcn.org To: Studded cc: obrien@NUXI.com, Jacques Vidrine , ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/smurflog In-Reply-To: <35BCD74B.7A83FA63@san.rr.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 27 Jul 1998, Studded wrote: > do read the commit logs. That wasn't my point. When a committer makes a > change to a port they should notify the maintainer of that port by > e-mail, period. It is a matter both of common courtesy and good I don't think you understand the problem. :) Over the last two days alone, I would have in excess of 20 maintainers to notify (assuming a 1:1 maintainer:port ratio). Propose an automated solution, if you wish. -- This .sig is not innovative, witty, or profund. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message