From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 9 03:46:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91E2D16A4CF; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 03:46:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.des.no (flood.des.no [217.116.83.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0974143D2A; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 03:46:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: by smtp.des.no (Pony Express, from userid 666) id A36FB5310; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 12:46:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwp.des.no (des.no [80.203.228.37]) by smtp.des.no (Pony Express) with ESMTP id 88D735309; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 12:46:45 +0100 (CET) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id 1041D33C6A; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 12:46:45 +0100 (CET) To: pav@FreeBSD.org References: <5.0.2.1.1.20031207171127.02d4f708@popserver.sfu.ca> <1070833971.78821.1.camel@hood.oook.cz> From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 12:46:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1070833971.78821.1.camel@hood.oook.cz> (Pav Lucistnik's message of "Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:52:51 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090024 (Oort Gnus v0.24) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on flood.des.no X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no version=2.60 cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org cc: Colin Percival Subject: Re: port maintainers not in contrib.additional.sgml X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 11:46:57 -0000 Pav Lucistnik writes: > I was under impression that only authors of new ports are listed there. > If someone take existing port, he's not automatically listed there. Anyone maintaining a port is most definitely a contributor and should be listed. > Rather than maintainer field you should pursue Whom: from port Makefiles > headers. The port Makefile headers are absolutely meaningless. I have no idea why they even exist, though ports people insist on keeping it. They provide no information which is not available in the Makefile itself or in CVS history. The Whom: line is often directly misleading as it is never updated, even in the case where the new maintainer has completely rewritten the Makefile so that the only thing left from the original is the header and the PORTNAME line. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no