Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 01:29:10 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.ORG>, Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.ORG>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, ports-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Chris Rees <crees@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/cad/admesh Makefile Message-ID: <20110815012910.GA62001@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E47EF20.8000409@FreeBSD.org> References: <CADLo839VotWbi209%2BeR3LAuQ4HqC-LSGY4avcUFXHat=HjsrKg@mail.gmail.com> <20110812093328.GE85247@hades.panopticon> <b0535f6d53bb546b54d85797ec66cf0b@etoilebsd.net> <20110812101133.GF85247@hades.panopticon> <4E4584EA.7090306@FreeBSD.org> <20110813133717.GA38385@hades.panopticon> <4E469837.1030903@FreeBSD.org> <20110813172040.GC38385@hades.panopticon> <20110814030033.GA80255@FreeBSD.org> <4E47EF20.8000409@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 05:52:00PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 14.08.2011 05:00, schrieb Alexey Dokuchaev: > > Big +1 for Dmitry here; ports@ is perfectly fine maintainer entity, much > > easier to work with, and often receives more and better care than many of > > seemingly "properly" maintained ports. > > Assuming that were true, how else do we make sure not to let rotten code > linger in the ports tree? I believe current measures work fine: check distfile availability, routinely run the port on tinderbox. What we are doing right now is enough; no need to make "maintained by ports@" mean anything particularly bad or unsafe. Real maintainers sometimes are just as bad when it comes to security and build fixes. Personally, I think of ports@ as being "maintained by Ports Fury, but they do not mind if I touch it sometimes". ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110815012910.GA62001>