From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 24 13:28:39 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67134881 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:28:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from decke@bluelife.at) Received: from mail-ob0-x235.google.com (mail-ob0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::235]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C293AAE for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:28:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id ni5so5262239obc.12 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 06:28:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bluelife.at; s=google; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=CrWIcKNmKJHvg1cK4Vs58dsU5rheGAvTQYgbE+4F0uo=; b=TfYU2rTg4GQ24+XoRDb1uKTZSjLeDw/YIdSnNCGHwmVLqsEiL3hOOjwFwEVC9Ii4/3 KC68ImdTcfAFYbhUGgglKbP3oLl1nxMs2jySQLwtVFbn1sf+LAcwh89POhtuLoVs5nAO rU+SzCMXTBckKRC3yQ9772SWCq40weCamWyrA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=CrWIcKNmKJHvg1cK4Vs58dsU5rheGAvTQYgbE+4F0uo=; b=nN4F7U8eLS+BUKkzHPcSMo6BngWEyJSmF7wG2u4Q8lEvgs7j6KoH+hMG53uPaopzNq JJ9mmhkiN4KrfszNefzWy2arNPUpu2Ar3eihqlTDAyTteI5ooa+6ZyZRRO2CR2llkptO CDBwm8P+fm2CjxZ6bK1pSUtfHvoHtS1Di2lrtLcbdy5qdEje2a0D257cZJN5ZBW/nSTS 3QHC7MuHf0jaXOoGRKwOKQG4YchidD2f0dHwG6xpTw9/cJsaMcrZlbcNu8cCbk6c3w5q 96qYDzsV+lNbYKVe5dIuKeIzihuk3eN4Q3rc69DbL+gUbx7fCJzRyRsmZsnBGI1O6xXF nunA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.3.200 with SMTP id e8mr8004333oee.94.1364131718607; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 06:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: decke@bluelife.at Received: by 10.76.99.114 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 06:28:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [2001:470:1f0b:1dbc:221:6aff:fe1e:6c60] In-Reply-To: <20130324085348.2fe3a8c1@scorpio> References: <20130323213126.59789466@scorpio> <20814.24592.288492.914792@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <20130324070452.176c84ce@scorpio> <514EED31.7070108@gmx.de> <20130324085348.2fe3a8c1@scorpio> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 14:28:38 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: WS8UTt8eiM34_tyAQawLlRtsENE Message-ID: Subject: Re: Updating curl From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkNyyljXmIiDp3hwOimfcQyV8sKtj5ODDMtCiow7xvKb2mfB8X3r9geChsuLzU7y/DMFyZb X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:28:39 -0000 On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Jerry wrote: > On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:10:25 +0100 > olli hauer articulated: > > [snip} > >> Just a quick question. >> How many ports do you maintain? > > Three, very simple ports. > >> I have to ask this question because it looks like you are always >> coming up with the same copy pasted text snippets (do you have them >> as text blocks in vim or emacs?) > > I have never created a boilerplate if that is what you are referring to. > >> If you are willing to do the maintenance of an actual curl port please >> come up with an patch and request maintainer ship. > > I am actually thinking about updating curl on my system and no I would > not release it since I am (1) not the maintain of said port, and (2) I > don't have the time to actively maintain it. Which brings us back to my > original statement, that being that if the current maintainer is not > going to properly maintain the port than they should publicly state > that fact which would allow another individual with sufficient time and > skill to do so. > > If you remember a few months ago, there was a discussion as to why > "Bash" lingered on for months, actually a year, with numerous patches > being issued by the Bash author yet never being included in the port's > system. Finally, another user created a "devel" port. Perhaps that is > the proper way to handle this problem. "Postfix", probably the best > maintained port in the entire system. has both a "stable" release and a > "current" release in the ports system. I will agree that > "sahil@FreeBSD.org" is probably an over achiever, but it is an example > of what can be accomplished, and in virtual real time no less, when > someone dedicates themselves to a task. Sorry, but that is the absolutely wrong approach. The way it works is by contributing not by keeping stuff in your hands and telling other that they should come up with a solution. If a port maintainer is unavailable for some time and unable to update the port himself then it would be the best way to contact him if he has something that you can help with. If he does not respond prepare an update yourself, test it and verify that it works fine and then submit the patch as PR. Then some committer will have a look and either the maintainer approves it or it becomes a maintainer timeout and after that the patch is committed. If you talk to the maintainer and he feels that you already care more about the port than he does I'm pretty sure he will offer to pass maintainership to you. If a maintainer is unavailable for a longer period (multiple maintainer timeouts) then the port maintainer will be reset anyway and can be adopted. -- Bernhard Froehlich http://www.bluelife.at/