From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Jan 25 09:24:10 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CEDC14AE7D3 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDEC471AE0 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 8E08014AE7D2; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:09 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B6E414AE7D1 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from land.berklix.org (land.berklix.org [144.76.10.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "land.berklix.org", Issuer "land.berklix.org" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39BDB71ADF for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from mart.js.berklix.net (p2E52C0CB.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.82.192.203]) (authenticated bits=0) by land.berklix.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0P9Nsc3018080 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:23:58 GMT (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (fire.js.berklix.net [192.168.91.41]) by mart.js.berklix.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id x0P9NoJE082471; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:23:50 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Received: from fire.js.berklix.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fire.js.berklix.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x0P9NQRT093244; Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:23:38 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jhs@berklix.com) Message-Id: <201901250923.x0P9NQRT093244@fire.js.berklix.net> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" cc: Warner Losh , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: timed restoral until deleter makes a port From: "Julian H. Stacey" Organization: http://berklix.eu BSD Unix Linux Consultants, Munich Aachen Kent User-agent: EXMH on FreeBSD http://berklix.eu/free/ X-From: http://www.berklix.eu/~jhs/ In-reply-to: Your message "Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:03:18 -0800." <201901250003.x0P03ImG085514@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 10:23:26 +0100 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 39BDB71ADF X-Spamd-Bar: + Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.58 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.74)[0.740,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.17)[-0.175,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[berklix.com]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.05)[0.050,0]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: land.berklix.com]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:144.76.0.0/16, country:DE]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(0.08)[ipnet: 144.76.0.0/16(2.73), asn: 24940(-2.33), country: DE(-0.01)]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[203.192.82.46.zen.spamhaus.org : 127.0.0.10] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 09:24:10 -0000 "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 4:13 PM Julian H. Stacey wrote: > > > > > Current box here is now about 10 seconds ahead, since timed was deleted, > > > still waiting for the code vandal who removed timed from src/ > > > without proper discussion in advance, to move timed from src/ to ports/ > > > > > > timed absence will bite more people when 13 is released. timed > > > should be restored to src/ until the code vandal is forced to write > > > a ports/ entry. Temporary removal of the src/ commit bit could encourage > > > this & admonish irresponsible conduct. > > > > > > The tech issues have been discussed before, no need to repeat, > > > this is just a question of enforcing responsible procedure. > > > > > > > The ball is in my court to approve a pull request so we can finish the > > port. We have plenty of time before 13 and current, is after all, current. > > So there's no need to do anything rash here. > > > > I think all the rest of this is without merit and an overreaction. > > Lets prevent this in the future and make it formal policy that > if the solution to a removal from src is that a port be created > the order must be port created and working, then src de-orbit. > > Agreeable? Sounds good. That's the way ctm is being handled. PS if anyone wonders "Why Use CTM Instead of, or as well as SVN ?" http://ctm.berklix.org Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, Consultant Systems Engineer, BSD Linux Unix, Munich Aachen Kent 1st referendum Stole 700,000 votes from British in EU, 3.7 million globally, 1.9 M too young to vote, 1.3 M died, mostly leavers. Fraud, fines & lies. Honest Ref. Now ! Revoke Art. 50 for now to buy time to plan to avoid chaos. http://exitbrexit.uk/#email_your_mp