From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Wed Jul 22 12:23:13 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CCC09A8EDD; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:23:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0361D7C; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:23:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 8DFA51ECE; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:23:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:23:13 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Pietro Cerutti Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r392666 - head/audio/libgroove Message-ID: <20150722122313.GA50653@FreeBSD.org> References: <201507220652.t6M6qVFO094263@repo.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:23:13 -0000 On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 01:49:37PM +0200, Pietro Cerutti wrote: > > @@ -1,29 +1,29 @@ > > -# Created by: gahr > > +# Created by: Pietro Cerutti > > I would have appreciated you notifying me of such change. > Is this modification really needed? It's obviously not *really* needed as it touches Makefile header, thus being non-functional. On on the other hand, we're not forbidding non-functional changes, right? :) I try to keep these tags consistent across committers and people without freefall login for a number of reasons, and first + last names with and email in angle brackets makes it look neat and standard. It's a bit sad that we did not advertise this form through the PHB since the beginning. > Are you going to change all similar occurrences in the ports tree? I won't convert them in bulk, most certainly. I do expand them when I notice one (and was not asked to leave that/those particular one alone). ./danfe