From owner-freebsd-ports  Sat May 18 07:06:31 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id HAA02226
          for ports-outgoing; Sat, 18 May 1996 07:06:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vector.jhs.no_domain (slip139-92-42-161.ut.nl.ibm.net [139.92.42.161])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id HAA02210;
          Sat, 18 May 1996 07:05:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vector.jhs.no_domain (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA12108; Fri, 17 May 1996 02:36:53 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199605170036.CAA12108@vector.jhs.no_domain>
X-Authentication-Warning: vector.jhs.no_domain: Host localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, n1epo4tl@ibmmail.com
Subject: Re: satan 
From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@FreeBSD.org>
Reply-To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@FreeBSD.org>
Organization: Vector Systems Ltd.
Address: Holz Strasse 27d, 80469 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49.89.268616
Fax: +49.89.2608126 (later)
Web: http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/
Mailer: EXMH version 1.6.5  95 12 11,  PGP available
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 14 May 1996 03:20:37 PDT."
             <199605141020.DAA12405@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> 
Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 02:36:53 +0200
Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi, Reference:
> From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) 
> Subject: Re: satan 
> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 03:20:37 -0700 (PDT) 
> Message-id: <199605141020.DAA12405@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> 
>
>  * As memory serves, there is a port but `soemeone in charge' ;-)
>  * declined to import what was offered (on philosophical rather than technica
- l
>  * grounds, ... this was maybe 6 months ago).
> 
> The satan port was uploaded to wcarchive's incoming and had
> disappeared before the porter sent mail asking "why didn't my port get
> in?" a few weeks later.  I never heard back from the porter since.
> 
> As far as I know, there has never been any philosophical discussion
> about whether the port is suitable or not.  At least not in -ports (I
> don't read all the lists), which is the only place to have an
> "official" discussion of that sort.

Oh, I had thought you & others had expressed opinions on Satan,
acceptability for/against (not WRT port quality), then it was finally
not imported, .... anyway,
If someone such as Stuart were to submit a Satan port, is it acceptable
(not WRT port quality), I mean in general ?

Julian
--
Julian H. Stacey	jhs@freebsd.org  	http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/