From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 4 00:29:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A92E316A4CE; Sun, 4 Apr 2004 00:29:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net (sccrmhc12.comcast.net [204.127.202.56]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50CD843D53; Sun, 4 Apr 2004 00:29:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rodrigc@h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com) Received: from dibbler.crodrigues.org (h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.31.45.197]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20040404082939012002ekcne>; Sun, 4 Apr 2004 08:29:39 +0000 Received: from dibbler.crodrigues.org (localhost.crodrigues.org [127.0.0.1]) i348TuBl039726; Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:29:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc@h00609772adf0.ne.client2.attbi.com) Received: (from rodrigc@localhost) by dibbler.crodrigues.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i348TuYr039725; Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:29:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from rodrigc) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:29:56 -0400 From: Craig Rodrigues To: Kris Kennaway Message-ID: <20040404082956.GA39680@crodrigues.org> References: <20040404023418.GA37816@crodrigues.org> <20040404025156.GA29009@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040404030247.GA38436@crodrigues.org> <20040404033602.GA29488@xor.obsecurity.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040404033602.GA29488@xor.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: ade@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Problems with USE_AUTOMAKE_VER variable X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 08:29:40 -0000 On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 07:36:02PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > From time to time infrastructural sweeps need to be made in order to > keep the ports collection maintainable and in good overall shape. > Since these are typically minor changes but can affect a lot of ports > it's often not practical to wait for approval for every maintainer, > because that blocks the change for weeks and we'd never get anything > done. That's fine, and I understand that such infrastructural work needs to be done. But would it kill you guys to send an e-mail to the port maintainer telling them what commits you are doing? It may not seem like much to you, but I would consider it common courtesy. I've worked with kuriyama@ and lev@ on the apr port, and they have been very good at giving me the heads up on minor changes that they have done. I consider the commits done by ade@ and krion@ to be in poor taste... if they gave me the heads up, maybe I could have helped. > Committers are expected to test all changes they make, so normally > this isn't a problem, except when the committer screws up and breaks > ports. In this case they are expected to quickly undo their damage; > I'm not happy that Ade has not done so. I expect him to test his > changes better in the future, and to submit patches for testing when > making changes that have a wide impact. I'd also like him to help you > resolve this problem, since it's causing continued pain. I'm going to have to undo some of these changes, and remove one of ade@'s patches. It looks like these autoconf macro changes have not been fully tested, so I am quite disappointed that these commits have gone in without anyone telling me about them. I don't have a commit bit, so I can't arbitrarily commit things. Was there an e-mail sent out to ports@ which explains the rationale for what is being done here? If I had been kept informed of what was going on, instead of being told about things after the fact by a third party, I wouldn't be so annoyed. -- Craig Rodrigues http://crodrigues.org rodrigc@crodrigues.org