Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 08:18:08 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Marcus Alves Grando <mnag@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, Andrew Pantyukhin <sat@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/misc/compat5x Makefile pkg-descr Message-ID: <20060603221808.GB713@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <4481A857.9040308@FreeBSD.org> References: <200606031355.k53Dtq9f037874@repoman.freebsd.org> <4481A857.9040308@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 2006-Jun-03 12:18:47 -0300, Marcus Alves Grando wrote: >Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: >> misc/compat5x Makefile pkg-descr >> Log: >> - Take maintainership > >Why? Many critical ports, maintainer is ports@. And keep this are a good >idea. I presume this was triggered by the recent thread on -ports encouraging people to take ownership of unloved ports. Unfortunately, this (and the other FreeBSD compat ports) are exceptions where the general rule that "maintainer = ports implies unloved" doesn't hold. misc/compat3x, misc/compat4x and misc/compat5x should probably all have maintainers in the src group. A quick suggestion would be re@ but it's not exactly within their scope. -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060603221808.GB713>