From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 30 01:26:13 2003 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 2C0D216A4C0; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lilith.bellavista.cz (lilith.bellavista.cz [213.235.167.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A83943F3F; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:26:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from neuhauser@bellavista.cz) Received: from freepuppy.bellavista.cz (freepuppy.bellavista.cz [10.0.0.10]) by lilith.bellavista.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B86A2D; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:26:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: by freepuppy.bellavista.cz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6D8522FDA01; Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:26:03 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 10:26:03 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser To: Adam Weinberger Message-ID: <20030930082603.GN11636@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> Mail-Followup-To: Adam Weinberger , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <20030909152452.GC10815@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <1063121517.50301.24.camel@jake> <20030929104642.GA8813@watt.intra.caraldi.com> <20030929225945.GT47415@toxic.magnesium.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030929225945.GT47415@toxic.magnesium.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: New port: NumlockX 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: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 08:26:13 -0000 # adamw@FreeBSD.org / 2003-09-29 18:59:45 -0400: > >> (09.29.2003 @ 0646 PST): Jean-Baptiste Quenot said, in 0.9K: << > > I'm wondering why it always takes *ages* to change the ports tree. > > Either the committers are not interested, or they don't have spare time > > to handle such requests. > >> end of "Re: New port: NumlockX" from Jean-Baptiste Quenot << > > This is why: > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr-summary.cgi?category=ports&state=open&responsible=freebsd-ports-bugs you're pointing at a problem and claiming that it's the cause of the problem. the huge number of unassigned port PRs is IMO result of FreeBSD having too few (active?) committers. the ports tree could use a lot more autonomous maintainers who don't have to beg or wait for long periods of time to have updates to their ports committed. don't the FreeBSD hacks to cvs(1) allow for ACL granularity to the directory level? (e. g. Alex Dupre could have commit in /usr/ports/databases/mysql[[:digit:]]+-(server|client)) -- If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html