Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:43:42 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: Simon Barner <barner@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Lars Thegler <lth@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Deprecating the signature at the end of pkg-descr (was: Re: cvs commit...) Message-ID: <1127295822.58280.21.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> In-Reply-To: <20050921092858.GA19214@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> References: <200509201420.j8KEKYa6066950@repoman.freebsd.org> <433100DE.2040901@FreeBSD.org> <43310DF2.8010100@FreeBSD.org> <43310F88.3040702@FreeBSD.org> <43311976.4070608@FreeBSD.org> <20050921092858.GA19214@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --]
Simon Barner píše v st 21. 09. 2005 v 11:28 +0200:
> Lars Thegler wrote:
> > So in either case, it seems the 'signature' in pkg-descr is redundant.
> > Either it reflects the creator's name, duplicating the comment section,
> > or it reflects the maintainer, duplicating the MAINTAINER= line.
>
> Section 5.5 says that the signature in pkg-descr is intended to keep the
> port creators real name, but that could be put into the comment section
> at the beginning of the Makefile (and in fact, that is what many/most
> people do).
The Who: header is also enforced by portlint.
> But I wonder where a somebody who agrees to take over maintainershipf of
> a new port could put his realname?
Nowhere. But it's recorded in the commit log in the CVS.
> > I wonder what the rationale for the 'recommendation' in 3.2.1 was? Anyone?
>
> I don't know, but I'd suggest getting rid of the signature all together,
> before starting a huge bikeshed.
\o/
> My suggestion is to update the porters' handbook in order to document
> the new policy, and send a small heads-up to freebsd-ports (patch
> attached).
I'd suggest dropping the text in the first chunk altogether.
Otherwise I like it. You will commit it or do you want me to handle it?
> I certainly don't propose to change all existing ports at once because
> is would be an unnecessary repo churn, but perhaps after a maintainer change,
> as Pav suggested.
Yup.
--
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
I cannot be responsible for future messages as apparently my cats have
learned to type.
[-- Attachment #2 --]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBDMStOntdYP8FOsoIRAtNrAKCBa72BJXAgCwMJYwywrpNeLM6dzgCeMwfT
YMqTMk4rUpHflHDiAf2YOkQ=
=M8ZQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1127295822.58280.21.camel>