From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 5 03:00:39 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4977F16A400 for ; Fri, 5 May 2006 03:00:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1019543D48 for ; Fri, 5 May 2006 03:00:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k4530coH011491 for ; Fri, 5 May 2006 03:00:38 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k4530c0e011490; Fri, 5 May 2006 03:00:38 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 03:00:38 GMT Message-Id: <200605050300.k4530c0e011490@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Jo Rhett Cc: Subject: Re: ports/95708: freebsd startup script for sec port X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Jo Rhett List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 May 2006 03:00:39 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/95708; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jo Rhett To: Sam Lawrance Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/95708: freebsd startup script for sec port Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 19:55:08 -0700 > On 05/05/2006, at 10:28 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: >> I'm highly amused that I would be asked to make some changes, when >> the request for said changes requires more typing than making the >> changes. This is what, 41 characters different? > On May 4, 2006, at 7:19 PM, Sam Lawrance wrote: > By sending an updated patch, the maintainer can test and approve > it, and a committer can then come along and grab the same patch and > commit it. It might seem inconvenient, but like many processes the > earlier you get it right, the higher the quality of the end product > - so that's what we like to encourage. Not inconvenient -- I'm going to do this as soon as I can get away from my day job commitments. I was just amused. I'm often amused by how many people will send e-mails back and forth that take more time than fixing the problem ;-) -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation