From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 31 12:51:44 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org 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 2CD8416A41F for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:51:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bfarrokhi@gmail.com) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A2543D49 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:51:43 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bfarrokhi@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i4so864302wra for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 05:51:42 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=fHKFS1bhLiZZ7GbaFQ1aV070obOoEa7fB5kuzdUK6HdEj92zR6TWtWXA67bXhEdS8uYBRn7uq/xCU8uQh5uX41SOFC/ZRXX5NXYzjmjhaMcPHQH4GU1uUZnTY6f96dxkGbgQsNiwbLbtA14AaAdiwICZnRe1Oli0501m7Mk2+F0= Received: by 10.54.129.7 with SMTP id b7mr2284807wrd; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 05:51:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.3.37 with HTTP; Sun, 31 Jul 2005 05:51:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9f7e126b05073105517b60d83f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 17:21:42 +0430 From: Babak Farrokhi To: pav@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <1122807251.24300.22.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <66A226C3557B48ED535E3FED@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <20050728170401.GA9534@soaustin.net> <20050728172249.GD66015@isis.sigpipe.cz> <20050728175142.GA11503@soaustin.net> <20050728225650.GE66015@isis.sigpipe.cz> <20050729020225.GA28471@soaustin.net> <20050729102158.GA73490@isis.sigpipe.cz> <20050729203324.GA19476@soaustin.net> <9f7e126b050730124130c9bf87@mail.gmail.com> <1122807251.24300.22.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon Subject: Re: New port with maintainer ports@FreeBSD.org [was: Question about maintainers] X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Babak Farrokhi List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2005 12:51:44 -0000 Pav, On 7/31/05, Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > > Let me give you an example: I am the maintainer for www/eventum. The > > current version in ports tree was 1.5.4 so I submitted the patch for > > 1.5.5 (ports/84297) and now version 1.6.0 is out but the patch is not > > submitted despite I was the maintainer myself. >=20 > Submitted on Friday, complained about it on Saturday? My bad. You are right. I really didn't notice the date while I originally had ports/83960 in mind to give as example. >=20 > We just don't have a _manpower_ to process all incoming PRs in 24 hours > after arrival timeframe. Your simple update of eventum took me 20 > minutes to fix, test and commit. I have it pretty extensively automated. > New ports usually takes longer, depending on how much committer have to > fix. Trust me, some submissions are really useless. >=20 > Should we just kill those? I believe not. >=20 > Now take a look at http://www.oook.cz/bsd/prstats/busters-ports.html > those are numbers of closed PRs in past 3 months. That gives me > 8 PRs/day. In practice I'm spending some four hours a day on it. > I got a paid fulltime job I have to do, and I also got some non-FreeBSD > pasttime activities, commonly called "a life". I am a ports freak and I always have a freshports.org rss feed to track ports changes as well as submitting updates and patches. It is obvious that ports team is doing a very good job with testing and fixing submissions. I personally learn too many things when you clean up the code before submission and I would like to thank you for the good job. (e.g. ports/84297). You are teaching people to submit cleaner codes and hopefully become commiters to help the project. I hope I can help someday. =20 >=20 > The point here is to view the situation from the standpoint of > committers. No one here can be doing this full-time. And people are > doing this for fun, don't forget. >=20 > Now a lot of committers spend a lot of time maintaining their own ports, > which are often complex and heavinly used. >=20 > What we could really use be some dedicated people with a lot of free > time and a good skill in ports. Those people are hard to find. >=20 > > Another example: I submitted patch to update editors/vim to patchlevel > > 79, now this version is vulnerable to arbitrary command execution > > according to CAN-2005-2368. So I submitted the patchlevel 85 > > (ports/84145) and also notified security-team@. But the port is still > > awaiting approval. >=20 > Well yes, it was three days old when you urged this at secteam. They > decided to wait on maintainer instead of rushing it in, as the > vulnerability is not that severe. >=20 > > There is really something wrong with the port management process. > > People's work is not being respected. So how do I get encouraged to > > submit my patches? >=20 > Now you cut yourself with double-edged sword. You want us to respect > your submission by not respecting O'Brien's maintainership? >=20 There is no point to bypass the maintainer approval except in emergency cases which does not apply to my submission to this port. However I only contacted secteam to notify them of the vulnerability and speed up the process (like I already did for ports/83006). I just thought maybe its a good idea to reduce the maintainer-timeout for security patches. > -- > Pav Lucistnik > >=20 > And now something completely different. >=20 >=20 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) >=20 > iD8DBQBC7K3TntdYP8FOsoIRAlu8AKCYgPe1kdvxYDbASRbeeQ4bHjMBUgCgkU5m > DXa66FdpBLkITcUydWM709E=3D > =3DpU33 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >=20 >=20 >=20 --=20 Babak Farrokhi email: babak@farrokhi.net web: http://farrokhi.net/