From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 17 21:40:27 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0297B106564A for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:40:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from mail.ipt.ru (mail.ipt.ru [194.62.233.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C7708FC15 for ; Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:40:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ipt.ru) Received: from sp34.ipt.ru ([194.62.233.107] helo=bs1.sp34.ru) by mail.ipt.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KJbD6-0000WJ-WB; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:40:25 +0400 Received: from bsam by bs1.sp34.ru with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1KJbEm-0000Ul-Qq; Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:42:08 +0400 To: Wesley Shields References: <20080701192524.GA13558@atarininja.org> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:42:08 +0400 In-Reply-To: <20080701192524.GA13558@atarininja.org> (Wesley Shields's message of "Tue\, 1 Jul 2008 15\:25\:24 -0400") Message-ID: <05440975@bs1.sp34.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jo Rhett , ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: please commit 124993 for cfengine-2.2.7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:40:27 -0000 On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:25:24 -0400 Wesley Shields wrote: > On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 11:48:42AM -0700, Jo Rhett wrote: > > cfengine hasn't had any updates for over a year now, as the maintainer > > is AWOL. I keep submitting patches but nobody commits them. > > > > The last update to 124993 contains a clean single patch from the > > current ports tree to 2.2.7. Can someone please commit this? > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=124993 > I will take this one and get it addressed. The PR you are quoting has > not been around long enough for a maintainer timeout, but the other PR > you reference[1] has. I suspect this is not an acceptable condition to > override the maintainer. Why is it not acceptable to override a maintainer? This port is not an infrastructure port, the maintainer is way long unresponsive. I see only one show-stopper: there is no patch (or PR) to change the maintainer. > For now I will put it in my name and address > it once I know the appropriate course of action (wait for maintainer > timeout or if the old timeout applies to this one as well). WBR -- Boris Samorodov (bsam) Research Engineer, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet SP FreeBSD committer, http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve