From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 24 07:54:29 2011
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC931065674;
	Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:54:29 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1F28FC0C;
	Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:54:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id 76DA15615E; Mon, 24 Oct 2011 02:35:54 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 02:35:54 -0500
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <20111024073554.GD10513@lonesome.com>
References: <201110222350.p9MNoNPP081796@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20111023202044.5e05632c.stas@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20111023202044.5e05632c.stas@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler <eadler@FreeBSD.org>,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/ZendOptimizer pkg-descr
 ports/audio/abcmidi pkg-descr ports/astro/accrete pkg-descr
 ports/devel/adabooch pkg-descr ports/databases/aolserver-nsmysql pkg-descr
 ports/archivers/aolserver-nszlib pkg-descr ports/comms/aprsd ...
X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree <cvs-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ports>,
	<mailto:cvs-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:54:29 -0000

On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 08:20:44PM -0700, Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> It's also a good gesture to inform a maintainer of the port of the
> planned changes ask for his/her agreement

True ... but in the cases like this which would require hundreds of
approval emails, it's not very feasible.

> Getting the mentor and portmgr@ approval is obviously not enough for
> that kind of changes, there should've been a community consensus on
> this first [...] (even portmgr@ is not authorized to make that kind
> of changes unless they're fixing the broken thing).

If you read the portmgr charter, we've been given a lot of leeway.
core@ felt that when writing the document that "go fix it" outweighed
many other considerations.

Frankly, I'm kind of surprised that this change was controversial; to
me, it seemed somewhat mechanical.

For cases where functionality changes, I could see it.

mcl