Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Sep 2016 18:43:37 -0400
From:      Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org>
To:        marino@freebsd.org, Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>, Adam Weinberger <adamw@anoxia.adamw.org>, Antoine Brodin <antoine@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r422160 - in head: chinese/fortune french/fortune-mod-zarathoustra misc/fortune-mod-bible misc/fortune-mod-bofh misc/fortune-mod-culmea-culmilor misc/fortune-mod-epictetus misc/fortune-...
Message-ID:  <0aaad8b7-67f7-1b08-81be-7610d74d5e1c@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <55840821-5f88-54b6-4b99-eb8e09d0ae22@marino.st>
References:  <201609141950.u8EJolO7085386@repo.freebsd.org> <857FD0DF-6ADA-48F5-B02B-81BCA7135E2C@adamw.org> <03e06c33-6185-334f-bf04-71321aaf2cb7@FreeBSD.org> <9ffe58d7-66b0-b357-1777-6e4d3d4f5297@marino.st> <fea8b56c-6aa1-2ec9-f66f-e17a8a912e0a@FreeBSD.org> <9d118285-dd65-0b88-59cd-c8130d4d4f6f@marino.st> <087264b0-36ab-e844-f2f9-8389566dd654@FreeBSD.org> <55840821-5f88-54b6-4b99-eb8e09d0ae22@marino.st>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

On 09/14/2016 18:01, John Marino wrote:
> Fact 2) I solved the problem.  The ports were cleaner as a result.

I think the disagreement is here. Not everyone agrees it's cleaner,
particularly having an un-maintained copy of fortune_strfile duplicating
the one in base.

> Fact 3) Somebody exerted energy to revert my work
> 
> There are over 26,000 ports.  This one should have caused no one to
> notice.  Half of the fortune ports are currently marked broken because
> they are unfetchable.  Even if you disagree for whatever reason, at
> *worst* it wasn't hurting anything.

But the disagreement is that it is setting a bad precedent, I think.

> The insult to injury it that this stuff was pulled immediately after I
> spent several days fixing SSL across the entire tree.  Trust me, I'm
> pretty ticked off right now and it is personal for me.

The SSL work is good stuff and I'm sure appreciated by many, including
myself. Disagreement over this small issue doesn't negate the positive
work on SSL. It's important to keep things in perspective, I think.

People don't tend to send mails to say thanks, unfortunately. Also,
people tend to do this kind of work for their own reasons, so having it
done is it's own reward. I think if you're motivated purely by doing
things for the greater good and the appreciation of the community, you
may be disappointed.

I think exploiting a "loophole" in the rules to add an un-maintained
port isn't going to win any kudos.

Aside from the above comments, I've tried to keep my communication
focused on technical details rather that personal issues to avoid making
this more frustrating. Let's get back to the technical issues now.

Thanks again for your work,
Steve



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0aaad8b7-67f7-1b08-81be-7610d74d5e1c>