Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 16:43:32 +0200 From: Dimitry Andric <dim@FreeBSD.org> To: Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> Cc: "ports@freebsd.org" <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Self committing... allowed or not? Message-ID: <9917125A-6342-4F62-B374-E4F456EDC015@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <55AB91ED.3080908@sorbs.net> References: <55AB91ED.3080908@sorbs.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail=_A84BCA5B-CAD5-4F5C-8E01-1E862AD9E4D5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 19 Jul 2015, at 14:02, Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> wrote: > > please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't self committing (those with the > commit bit committing their own patches without QA/review/adding > patchfiles to the PR) against the rules?... or is it just a free-for-all > now? If they are the maintainer, it is OK by definition. Otherwise, approval from either the maintainer or portmgr@ is needed. However, a number of people are on vacation, and they have notified other developers that is OK to fix their ports while they are away. Within reason, of course. :-) In any case, which specific ports are you worried about? -Dimitry --Apple-Mail=_A84BCA5B-CAD5-4F5C-8E01-1E862AD9E4D5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.27 iEYEARECAAYFAlWrt5sACgkQsF6jCi4glqNWtgCgjvJGooa93myRfnn1LRL+8pUo lSsAoNi221cvnBpgI3wtCDC1u2aunU7R =6ii6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_A84BCA5B-CAD5-4F5C-8E01-1E862AD9E4D5--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9917125A-6342-4F62-B374-E4F456EDC015>