From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 12 20:04:13 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2460C106564A for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:04:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF0148FC0A for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:04:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iaeo4 with SMTP id o4so3942986iae.13 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:04:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=FMQHTLAk2ADW+aOwFjayhEQp76MIzXb56/GJQakrN2o=; b=QJ/NjLMUmFCa24+ph0JiY13cd6sC+plcctgrdxy64CXPJeBqQOHtNtuNSetdCgxFPj PCEPN9G1Up14sDwinRVa9sqvtgTCnwbEbC2P9BWsjGw3PPU5dUYOuR6Bwj0YeZMtFwx3 eFcy8tMCKFnKGnOE4S3atS8aGhfLXL+qbyrJU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.15.231 with SMTP id a7mr23127863igd.20.1329077008677; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.183.21 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:03:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.183.21 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:03:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20120212193927.GA86426@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20120212193927.GA86426@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:03:28 +0000 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: Steve Kargl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please test your commits X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:04:13 -0000 On 12 Feb 2012 19:39, "Steve Kargl" wrote: > > Is there any reguirement that a ports committer needs > to test their intended commit prior to pulling the > trigger? > Could this not have gone directly to the 'offending' developer? Chris