From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Nov 10 06:39:19 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD91316A4CE
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:39:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bloodwood.hunterlink.net.au (mail.hunterlink.net.au
	[203.12.144.18])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C393243FE0
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:39:18 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from boris@brooknet.com.au)
Received: from [202.7.67.16] (as1-p16.mait.hunterlink.net.au [202.7.67.16])
	hAAEcuBJ013337
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:39:07 +1100
From: Sam Lawrance <boris@brooknet.com.au>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <20031110152000.622db381.lehmann@ans-netz.de>
References: <1068458390.38101.19.camel@dirk.no.domain>
	 <20031110152000.622db381.lehmann@ans-netz.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1068471598.38101.77.camel@dirk.no.domain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:39:58 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Ability for maintainers to update own ports
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:39:20 -0000

[Whoops, and to the list...]
On Tue, 2003-11-11 at 01:20, Oliver Lehmann wrote:
> Sam Lawrance wrote:
> 
> > beneficial to everyone, reducing the number of ports PRs and letting
> > port updates flow through a little faster.
> 
> And lower perforcely the quality of the ports tree.
> You know what I mean? There is nothing like a bit QA then. Four or
more
> eyes are better than two.

I guess that's one of the challenges to be dealt with. Having briefly
examined nbsd's pkgsrc-wip I think it is a good source of QA. I would
like to combine this with a better way of channeling changes back into
the tree. Best of both worlds - faster/wider distribution of new
changes, larger base of reviewers.

But you are right - anything that lowers the quality of the ports tree
would be an absolute no-go.