Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:34:09 -0200 From: Marcelo Araujo <araujobsdport@gmail.com> To: Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org> Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.org, pgollucci@FreeBSD.org, bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/125243: GNOME Macro (178 Ports) Message-ID: <20090117013409.GA87660@ponderosa.intelbras.com.br>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 07:10:55PM +0100, Erwin Lansing wrote: >=20 > I have no problem with this change, except it needs to wait until after > the slush is lifted. When committed, one, or both, of you should be > standby to fix potential fallout, so I'd suggest scheduling it at at the > start of the day and where you have some time available for the > following few days. Also, as gnome@ maintains most of the affected > ports, I'd suggest running it by them, but I don't see a reason why they > should have a problem with it. All in all, handle it with care but I > see no reason for action by portmgr. Go ahead. Hy guys, About this PR ports/125243, I'd like to run this patch into the CLUSTER to ensure that all are OK before to commit it. I tested this patch, but in anyway I need a double check. PATCH: http://people.freebsd.org/~araujo/logs/gnome.diff I'll need that portmgr approve these modifications. I waiting a reply, thanks. Best Regards, --=20 Marcelo Araujo araujo@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org Never argue with an artist. --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJcTWQovxJd1Pkz6gRAlN5AJwPn3pTkhEVKwVBz5baQqU33S108gCfYyNZ tWb54sI7YnfYakt/wRkAEWY= =d7Uk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sdtB3X0nJg68CQEu--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090117013409.GA87660>