From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 15 18:22:41 2012 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE40F106564A for <freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:22:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scheidell@freebsd.org) Received: from mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net (mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net [204.89.241.253]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 878468FC15 for <freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org>; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:22:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net (mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net [10.70.1.253]) by mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F267621C27; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:22:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: SpammerTrap(r) VPS-1500 2.18 at mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net Received: from USBCTDC001.secnap.com (usbctdc001.secnap.com [10.70.1.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.secnap.com.ionspam.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4858F621C06; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:22:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from macintosh.secnap.com (10.70.3.3) by USBCTDC001.secnap.com (10.70.1.1) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.0.722.0; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:22:33 -0400 Message-ID: <4F623369.9060901@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:22:33 -0400 From: Michael Scheidell <scheidell@freebsd.org> Organization: SECNAP Network Security Corp User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 Thunderbird/3.1.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@gmail.com> References: <201203151243.q2FCh1e3044202@freefall.freebsd.org> <4F622A8E.2000401@p6m7g8.com> <4F623284.4010701@p6m7g8.com> In-Reply-To: <4F623284.4010701@p6m7g8.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: appleboy.tw@gmail.com, freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/161231: [NEW PORT] www/sencha-touch: The First HTML5 Mobile Web App Framework X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports <freebsd-ports-bugs.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports-bugs> List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs>, <mailto:freebsd-ports-bugs-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:22:41 -0000 On 3/15/12 2:18 PM, Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > If its just sitting there, you can just leave unless you take an > interest in it and someone will get to it eventually. > I figure if the submitter ever sends in a followup, and it is still opened, and owned by freebsd-ports-bugs, some new (nieve ) committer will take a look at it. than again, if a new-port submitter/maintainer can't even respond to his new port in 14 days, maybe he won't make such a good maintainer anyway. Are you suggesting that this be good practice for new ports? not all pr's, just new ports? -- Michael Scheidell, CTO >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell