Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 21:43:39 +1000 From: Kubilay Kocak <koobs@FreeBSD.org> To: Stanislaw Halik <sthalik@tehran.lain.pl>, Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, "James A. McGuire" <j.a.mcguire@gmail.com> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: noip-2.1.9_3 Message-ID: <75ca0930-584e-405a-ee99-0e796bf0edd8@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <a8a8d7fc-896b-ebf0-0bd8-26a2329979bc@misaki.pl> References: <CADPthFdUyAGUMpPpAJ16g8W_mR_RkYsWF4BezjkWC2k5aW0j1g@mail.gmail.com> <8d22b341-b1ec-f2b9-d7e0-61564bdb8bb2@misaki.pl> <20160831113651.GF96200@home.opsec.eu> <a8a8d7fc-896b-ebf0-0bd8-26a2329979bc@misaki.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 31/08/2016 9:42 PM, Stanislaw Halik wrote: > On 2016-08-31 Wed 13:36, Kurt Jaeger wrote: >>> It can sure be changed with a patch. I'd like however to wait >>> for someone with ports commit bit to comment as to whether that >>> change lies within the scope of what the ports tree does. My >>> understanding is that the ports tree generally doesn't introduce >>> new functionality. >> >> I suggest to add that feature with a patch and then submit that >> change upstream so that upstream adds that feature, too. > > Hey, > > Last upstream update was in 2009. The source tarball's hosted by > ehaupt@ since the original URI returns 404. Ah, so we're upstream ;) > sh
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?75ca0930-584e-405a-ee99-0e796bf0edd8>