From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Fri Oct 9 22:44:06 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E60A59D2CED for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 22:44:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (mail.sorbs.net [67.231.146.200]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5F84BF8 for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2015 22:44:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NVZ00I0R63WH300@hades.sorbs.net> for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2015 15:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <5618432C.3090607@sorbs.net> Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 00:43:56 +0200 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 To: Torsten Zuehlsdorff Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Martin_Waschb=FCsch?= , FreeBSD ports Subject: Re: Commiter needed for PR 200652 References: <5617B8E3.1070801@toco-domains.de> <5617B984.2010002@toco-domains.de> In-reply-to: <5617B984.2010002@toco-domains.de> X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 22:44:07 -0000 Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: > > > On 09.10.2015 14:53, Torsten Zuehlsdorff wrote: >> Hello, >> >>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200652 >>> >>> It's glue to use the existing ports >>> >>> p5-CGI-ExtDirect >>> p5-RPC-ExtDirect >>> >>> with plack environment. >>> >>> It's been open since June, so perhaps someone could take pity and >>> commit it? :-D >> >> I'm not a committer, but i take a short look at it. I think you should >> make a little more QA. >> >> First i see there is a PORTEPOCH. Since this is a new port, this line >> should be there. > > There is a "not" missing ;) PORTEPOCH is not required for a new port. From: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.html -> It is expected that PORTEPOCH will not be used for the majority of ports, and that sensible use of PORTVERSION can often preempt it becoming necessary if a future release of the software changes the version structure. Regards, -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/