From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 4 15:07:53 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EB2FB4E; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 15:07:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from udns.ultimatedns.net (unknown [IPv6:2602:d1:b4d6:e600:4261:86ff:fef6:aa2a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A604FC9; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 15:07:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ultimatedns.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by udns.ultimatedns.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t24F8xAT022719; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 07:09:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bsd-lists@bsdforge.com) To: Doug Hardie , Kubilay Kocak In-Reply-To: <54F6DD1B.6080400@FreeBSD.org> References: <93878D88-4F1E-41EF-B99B-0B70119DDE0C@lafn.org> <54F6155C.3010405@FreeBSD.org> <54F6AA26.1080404@FreeBSD.org> <2A646BF8-F061-4C8D-ACD3-A08DBF1EF5F0@lafn.org> <54F6D8FC.2080703@FreeBSD.org>, <54F6DD1B.6080400@FreeBSD.org> From: "Chris H" Subject: Re: Approving a patch Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 07:09:00 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=fixed MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-id: <1abfdf1d233fbfca0afeba6d4528d049@ultimatedns.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "bugmeister@freebsd.org" , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Bryan Drewery X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 15:07:53 -0000 On Wed, 04 Mar 2015 21:23:23 +1100 Kubilay Kocak wrote > On 4/03/2015 9:05 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > > On 4/03/2015 9:00 PM, Doug Hardie wrote: > >> > >>> On 3 March 2015, at 22:45, Kubilay Kocak wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Canonically and preferred: > >>> > >>> Set maintainer-approval flag to + *on the attachment/patch*. > >>> > >>> The maintainer-feedback flag is at the issue/bug scope, not the > >>> attachment/patch scope. > >>> > >>> This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with > >>> your email as the value first. > >>> > >>> Currently this is not automatic, but *should be* if there is an > >>> attachment of type: patch in the issue. I'll create an issue for that > >>> now for bugmeister@ to look into addressing. > >>> > >>> Only in cases where maintainer-approval is *not* already set to"?", is > >>> using the maintainer-feedback flag + comment flow OK. > >>> > >>> Setting maintainer-feedback is ambiguous, and is used to prove > >>> 'acknowledgement' of an issue or question. > >>> > >>> This is especially the case when there are multiple version of patches, > >>> or patches from multiple contributors. In future it will be used to > >>> derive "maintainer timeouts" to kick issues along, and open them up for > >>> someone else to make a decision on. > >>> > >>> tldr; Set the maintainer-approval flag to + > >>> > >> > >> Thanks to all who replied. I found and set the maintainer-feedback flag > >> at the issue/bug scope. I couldn’t find any similar flag at the > >> attachment/patch scope. Nothing there was really applicable. >> > > > > Which issue? > > > > Doug, > > Ignore that, I found it: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198224 > > I've set the maintainer-approval flag to "+" for you. > > Note: this is what I meant in my on-list reply by: > > "This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with > your email as the value first." > > In your issues case, the flag hadn't been set yet. > > I've created a new issue on this exact point, so as to make setting the > maintainer-approval flag automatic. You can follow it here: > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198271 Along those lines; would it make any sense to convert the current [select] into a [radio]? I must admit, it took me awhile to *conclusively* determine what best applied, and when/where. It all just seemed a bit more difficult to ascertain, than need be. Using a [radio] would allow for a more concise (intuitive?) description. Just a thought. --Chris > > -- > Regards, > > Kubilay Kocak > Bugmeister > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"