From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 7 08:43:05 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46CB216A4A0; Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:43:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2215513C4B9; Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:43:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Received: from [212.40.38.87] (oddity-e.topspin.kiev.ua [212.40.38.87]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id KAA16916; Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:42:59 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@icyb.net.ua) Message-ID: <45C99112.4080201@icyb.net.ua> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 10:42:58 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070119) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pav Lucistnik , bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org References: <200702070823.l178NWMZ038730@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <200702070823.l178NWMZ038730@freefall.freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-U Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: ports/104271: devel/kdbg: fails to open core file 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: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 08:43:05 -0000 on 07/02/2007 10:23 Pav Lucistnik said the following: > Synopsis: devel/kdbg: fails to open core file > > State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed > State-Changed-By: pav > State-Changed-When: Wed Feb 7 08:22:57 UTC 2007 > State-Changed-Why: > Feedback timeout (1 month) > > Once you have patches, please, file a new PR with them > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=104271 Pav, sorry if I will sound a little bit harsh, but don't you think that you are being a little bit overzealous at closing PRs in this case ? What kind of feedback did you expect ? Is a problem for which there are no patches [yet] not a problem anymore ? Doesn't mere existence of a real and acknowledged problem warrant an open PR ? Why did you take responsibility over this PR in the first place if you weren't going to submit your patches or help in anyway for this problem to be [really] resolved ? I can confirm that the problem still exists and I insist that this PR be re-opened. Only if for avoiding duplicate PRs and increasing a chance that somebody (not necessarily the maintainer or me) will look into this. Apologies again for being emotional, but that's how I feel about this kind of attitude towards PRs. I do appreciate everything else you do for FreeBSD and for the ports including herculean task of PR management. -- Andriy Gapon