Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 15:57:07 -0500 From: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> To: John Marino <cbssports@marino.st>, John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r382341 - in head/lang: gcc46 gcc47 gcc48 gcc49 gcc5 Message-ID: <551472A3.8000105@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <551470F9.60306@marino.st> References: <201503262036.t2QKa4Aw076378@svn.freebsd.org> <55147032.4020401@FreeBSD.org> <551470F9.60306@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --VHuGvpguBuTDjFowHD1RLUujc77T77nQg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/26/2015 3:50 PM, John Marino wrote: > On 3/26/2015 21:46, Bryan Drewery wrote: >> On 3/26/2015 3:36 PM, John Marino wrote: >>> Author: marino >>> Date: Thu Mar 26 20:36:04 2015 >>> New Revision: 382341 >>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/382341 >>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r382341/ >>> >>> Log: >>> lang/gcc(46,47,48,49,5): Use OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_DragonFly to block JAV= A >>> =20 >>> The JAVA frontend doesn't build on DragonFly on any release. The n= ew >>> OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_${OPSYS} feature is a nice way to avoid the use of >>> Makefile.DragonFly (most are in dports, but one is in lang/gcc5). >>> =20 >>> The recent addition of CXXFLAGS to lang/gcc5 prevents Makefile.Drag= onFly >>> on lang/gcc5 from being removed outright. There are a couple of op= tions >>> available to allow its removal, but I'll need to discuss with Geral= d. >>> =20 >>> Approved by: DragonFly blanket >>> >> >> >> Why do you ignore all feedback? I find this as grounds for removal of >> commit bit. >> >> Why do DragonFly hacks belong in FreeBSD Ports? Not even DragonFly use= s >> FreeBSD Ports, it uses dports. So why can these hacks not be in dports= ? >=20 > Please take these threats offline. > Your "feedback" directly conflicts with permission I've been given. No it absolutely does not. _Bapt_ gave you permission to do DragonFly cleanups yes. This is not a blank approval to whatever you want. I've voiced much feedback over the past few days (as well as amdmi3) that you have completely ignored while hiding behind 'bapt approved it'. That is not how this community works. I have voiced objections to DragonFly-specific hacks since day 1. When I approved OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_OPSYS this morning I specifically objected to committing OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_DragonFly to the tree. It is a useful feature nonetheless. I also asked you to try to be less dragonfly-specific this morning. I too am portmgr. Bapt's year+ old blanket approval does not mean you get to ignore all new feedback. > If you want to kick me out as I'm coming up on 2000 commits, that > majority which have been directly beneficial to FreeBSD, then discuss i= t > with portmgr and do what you must. >=20 I really don't care if you have 900000 commits. You must follow the basic community rules of responding to feedback and listening to others. You constantly ignore others. > John >=20 Bryan --VHuGvpguBuTDjFowHD1RLUujc77T77nQg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVFHKjAAoJEDXXcbtuRpfPEfQH/1T+aNmjB7s7RccYSBk7qYbt FgNXdGGEiZLJl4Jeh+izh/Xl+7plZ7vKasblOcSDtQEKPecq42uZGGxWJfj+ltm0 TFJXUPC1ofOQgnSN7jmzibq1FvCZ4OQvGYReUFH1pkWmtxid0Gi7+xx/s1QdnYyj 5rxsWq3RyXM9JGaV//LXofrJ1HqyH2H40RsQpO54xCxBfS0lUBxKjr1HFsRj4A3N ZKiq3orQBvUL1eWnCe5eVfknrc+tnFzSX0NcW2k98FsVvcN2dNDazHDG4L7P4TT2 j2qHOs02AI5IF5uiZ70NjK4/BPyI95aRy7rbw+l8MOZex9KLr5d3giYc94pbAGQ= =eegp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VHuGvpguBuTDjFowHD1RLUujc77T77nQg--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?551472A3.8000105>