From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 30 02:45:21 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38ACE16A402 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:45:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@chillt.de) Received: from dd15624.kasserver.com (dd15624.kasserver.com [85.13.136.215]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 025DC13C4B8 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:45:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@chillt.de) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dslb-084-061-115-171.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.115.171]) by dd15624.kasserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992F918228960 for ; Fri, 30 Mar 2007 04:19:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <460C73A4.1070901@chillt.de> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 03:19:16 +0100 From: Bartosz Fabianowski User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070306) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: 170kB patch - how to handle? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 02:45:21 -0000 Good day I would like to improve the audio/libvorbis port by optionally patching in the aoTuV psychoacoustics, which are considered to be superior to stock libvorbis. However, the patch file that does this is ~170kB in size. I am wondering whether it is OK to put such a large file directly into the ports tree or if it should be downloaded as a distfile by each user. Is there any guideline on which would be the correct method? I would hate for my suggestion to be rejected by the port's maintainer due to me getting a formality like this wrong. Thanks, - Bartosz