From owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 14 08:35:52 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ruby@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0721065673 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pav@FreeBSD.org) Received: from raven.customer.vol.cz (raven.customer.vol.cz [195.250.144.108]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D668FC18 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:35:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pav.hide.vol.cz (nat-application.b1.lan.prg.vol.cz [195.122.204.152]) (authenticated bits=0) by raven.customer.vol.cz (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o8E8Zn9b071955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:35:50 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from pav@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <4C8F33E5.6050906@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 10:35:49 +0200 From: Pav Lucistnik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100909 Thunderbird/3.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Philip M. Gollucci" References: <4C8EB9BC.4020208@p6m7g8.com> <20100913173804.d4aa5eb9.stas@FreeBSD.org> <4C8F05FF.7060309@p6m7g8.com> In-Reply-To: <4C8F05FF.7060309@p6m7g8.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 195.250.144.108 Cc: Stanislav Sedov , ruby@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD Port Management Team Subject: Re: portupgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Ruby discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 08:35:52 -0000 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