Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:35:49 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> To: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com> Cc: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org>, ruby@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD Port Management Team <portmgr@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: portupgrade Message-ID: <4C8F33E5.6050906@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4C8F05FF.7060309@p6m7g8.com> References: <4C8EB9BC.4020208@p6m7g8.com> <20100913173804.d4aa5eb9.stas@FreeBSD.org> <4C8F05FF.7060309@p6m7g8.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2010/09/14 07:19, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> On 09/14/10 00:38, Stanislav Sedov wrote:
>> there's a branch in projects/ we use for developing pkgtools.
>> This place is exactly where portupgrade-devel comes from.
> I've deleted my user svn portupgrade bits.
>
>> Saying this, I'm absolutely against passing the port to ports@.
>> The reason it's assigned on ruby@ and not ports@ is that we
>> don't want random people committing to this port thus possibly
>> destabilizing the important tool.
> Maybe assign it to new alias/group portupgrade@ then.
Oh please, not another hollow alias.
Since you asked for portmgr's opinion by Ccing this mail...
I personally think the maintainer field should read 'stas' and patches
should be gated through him. Usual maintainer timeouts apply.
--
Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz>
<pav@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C8F33E5.6050906>