From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 27 12:00:24 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CE11065693 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:00:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8248FC14 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:00:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz12 with SMTP id 12so1872434bwz.13 for ; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:00:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=OmrDB4p1eZLyVepQ6Vb8uK0SE7KedDPmCuOTAe81//w=; b=Z9s5grbqhXCVw3UPJ+7ZcT7DwA93L2nf2oV2vp6avuMC5O2kl0JPZXVsc+9jVBt6C7 uQQ4DrIsAl/VCHm23IFp9XGKePYRR2NUk8+b9fYT7MxpUgCCOTJovNbJlGuUC5WM/jPE XBH8hXG33WX5o0cXlmrr83o3ScYsFySW8SzvU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; b=JQKHhpn9vh8+lei7oecRxswvJGYVZWazOvkW72LzUkkiGccW5RPw1r4soc5Hdxcs0p AvSgo6b64Wsl889kNtWlBoX1n4yjj/EU7IJEyUfvmtgZXUNswpYy/eRp9z153JGukBTx jElIOwIIqF75eAcfnyHyXWqm2VfSCYyR/vd3w= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.19.76 with SMTP id z12mr1846277bka.205.1303905617611; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.21 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.21 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Apr 2011 05:00:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110427075436.70ae18ac@seibercom.net> References: <4DB7B237.7000603@marino.st> <20110427075436.70ae18ac@seibercom.net> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: How are [MAINTAINER] patches handled and why aren't PRs FIFO? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: utisoft@gmail.com List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 12:00:24 -0000 On 27 Apr 2011 12:55, "Jerry" wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400 > arrowdodger <6yearold@gmail.com> articulated: > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino > > wrote: > > > > > Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain: > > > ports/156541 "[MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release > > > version and add C++" > > > > > > Nobody has touched it, but many other PRs after that submission > > > have been assigned, etc. > > > > Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck. > > Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially broken, > is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system where each submitted > PR is assigned a specific number (I believe it is actually) and then > assigned in numeric order to the next available committer. That > committer would then be responsible for either committing the > PR/Port/Whatever within a preset time frame, or informing the original > submitter why the said article was not/could not be approved at the > present time. Allowing a submitter to languish while pondering what has > become of their document certainly does seem justified. > > I am sure that the old, "But they are all volunteers", or some such > tirade will erupt. It must be remembered that those who submit items for > approval are also volunteers. They deserve at least as much respect as > those who are actively working on those submitted items. How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful. Chris