Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 12:41:28 +0200 From: Anton Berezin <tobez@FreeBSD.org> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@mat.cc> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/p5-Cache-Memcached Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <20050924104128.GE14490@heechee.tobez.org> In-Reply-To: <C3FF05D58E5ACEECF4F8946F@cc-126-240.int.t-online.fr> References: <200509220748.j8M7mYMT043867@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050922164036.GA97847@utopia.leeym.com> <20050922184057.GA97327@heechee.tobez.org> <C3FF05D58E5ACEECF4F8946F@cc-126-240.int.t-online.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 12:05:06PM +0200, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +-le 22/09/2005 20:40 +0200, Anton Berezin écrivait : > | On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 12:40:36AM +0800, Yen-Ming Lee wrote: > |> On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:48:34AM +0000, Anton Berezin wrote: > |> > Update to 1.15. Require perl from ports. Assign maintainer to perl@. > |> Just curious... > |> > |> Is it a policy to assign maintainer to perl@ for the ports@ owned p5-* > |> ports? > | > | Not really, it's a matter of personal preference. I did not feel like > | having a maintainer lock on some of those ports, but I did not want them > | to stay unmaintained, either. There is, I think, a better chance that > | someone (myself included) will take care of such when they belong to > | perl@ as opposed to ports@. > > In other words, you want them maintained, but not by you ;-) That, I suppose, is one way to look at it, although it is not quite what I have had in mind. \Anton. -- An undefined problem has an infinite number of solutions. -- Robert A. Humphrey
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050924104128.GE14490>