From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 19 17:04:33 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0231E1065674;
	Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:04:33 +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 2D1248FC14;
	Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:04:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id BD8C1561B2; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:04:25 -0600 (CST)
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:04:25 -0600
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To: Michael Scheidell <scheidell@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20120119170425.GD23733@lonesome.com>
References: <4F159530.3030306@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4F159530.3030306@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org,
	Edwin Groothuis <edwin@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: ports/164244: multimedia/mplayer: last update
 (1.0.r20111218) conflicts with devel/ncurses
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 17:04:33 -0000

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:35:12AM -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> the solution would be for the submitter to work with the maintainer
> on a solution, or am I supposed to fix this without reversing this?

In general each of us, as committers, is responsible for whatever side-
effects of the changes we commit, are.  As Harry S Truman once said,
"the buck stops here".

So if there's breakage, then it needs to be first understood, then
dealt with.  If there is no other way than the horrible backout/PORTEPOCH
dance, then so be it.

But the takeaway is that we can't expect the PR submitters, or even
port maintainers, to get anything right.  It sure makes life easier
when they do, but we can't take it for granted.

As committers, we are that QA step.

mcl