From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun  5 23:38:39 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 AF6661065773
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Thu,  5 Jun 2008 23:38:39 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: from syn.atarininja.org (syn.csh.rit.edu [129.21.60.158])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 887478FC19
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Thu,  5 Jun 2008 23:38:39 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wxs@atarininja.org)
Received: by syn.atarininja.org (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 4DED15C34; Thu,  5 Jun 2008 19:40:13 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:40:13 -0400
From: Wesley Shields <wxs@FreeBSD.org>
To: Nikolaj Thygesen <mailinglist@diamondbox.dk>
Message-ID: <20080605234013.GB54936@atarininja.org>
References: <48486F30.1000603@diamondbox.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <48486F30.1000603@diamondbox.dk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Commiting new ports
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:38:39 -0000

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 12:56:48AM +0200, Nikolaj Thygesen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>     I hope this is the right list to ask this question. I recently 
> commited a new port, and received two messages from "ports." The first 
> one noted that a person had assigned the port to himself, and the second 
> mail simply stated that the PR went from "open" to "closed" due to 
> "feedback timeout." I reckon this means the port was rejected, but have 
> no clue for what reason. Was I supposed to supply any kind of feedback 
> somewhere??

I would suggest following up with the person who closed the PR (which I
assume was the same person it was assigned to).  There is a good chance
the feedback request was not seen by you for any number of reasons.
Lastly, the feedback being requested should also be in the audit-trail
of the PR if possible, so you may be able to look there if you have not
already.

Without more information I'm afraid we can't help you further.  We would
need, at a minimum, the PR number to follow up.

-- WXS