From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 21 02:08:56 2008 Return-Path: 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 1CE3F106566C for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:08:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga@FreeBSD.org) Received: from capeta.freebsdbrasil.com.br (capeta.freebsdbrasil.com.br [201.48.151.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7482F8FC17 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:08:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from garga@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 4994 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2008 00:08:54 -0200 Received: by simscan 1.1.0 ppid: 4935, pid: 4946, t: 14.3570s scanners: clamav: 0.91.1/m: spam: 3.1.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin: -last, FreeBSD Brasil LTDA rulesets: Yes X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=3.7 Received: from unknown (HELO botelhor.bluepex.com) (garga@189.19.84.134) by capeta.freebsdbrasil.com.br with SMTP; 21 Oct 2008 00:08:39 -0200 Received: (qmail 76612 invoked by uid 1001); 21 Oct 2008 00:08:33 -0200 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:08:33 -0200 From: Renato Botelho To: Maxim Sobolev Message-ID: <20081021020832.GA75514@bluepex.com> References: <200810201626.m9KGQFZx016617@repoman.freebsd.org> <48FCBBC5.4070603@FreeBSD.org> <20081020174908.GA9181@icarus.home.lan> <48FCCAB5.5020208@FreeBSD.org> <48FCCC88.6090009@FreeBSD.org> <80995414@ipt.ru> <48FD2D0C.5040101@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <48FD2D0C.5040101@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: Jeremy Chadwick , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Boris Samorodov , wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/asterisk Makefile ports/net/asterisk/files patch-main-utils.c patch-main::utils.c X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 02:08:56 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 06:14:52PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Boris Samorodov wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:23:04 -0700 Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >> Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >>> Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:11:33AM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >>>>> Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > >>>>>> koitsu 2008-10-20 16:26:15 UTC > >>>>>> > >>>>>> FreeBSD ports repository > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Modified files: > >>>>>> net/asterisk Makefile Added files: > >>>>>> net/asterisk/files patch-main-utils.c Removed files: > >>>>>> net/asterisk/files patch-main::utils.c Log: > >>>>>> - Follow present-day naming scheme of files/ patches > >>>>>> - Increase PORTREVISION > >>>>> Jeremy, > >>>>> > >>>>> If you have not noticed there is an active maintainer for this > >>>>> port. I would appreciate if you run all your changes through > >>>>> him. This patch should have been submitted to the Digium bug > >>>>> tracking system. > >>>> ports/127829 was filed over 2 weeks ago with no response. The reporter > >>>> spoke to me privately (since we were discussing scheduler stuff) and > >>>> mentioned this PR. I told him if you did not respond within 2 weeks > >>>> (maintainer timeout), that I would commit the fix -- he felt it was very > >>>> urgent to get this done promptly. > >>> The issue is hardly a critical one and there is no such thing as > >>> "automatic 2 weeks timeout". > > > >> ..."automatic 2 weeks timeout on PRs", I mean. > > > >> If you have contacted me privately you would have probably learned > >> that I am working on update to the port and planning on including this > >> change into it. > > > > I'm not sure what do you mean by "automatic" but those links may give > > you requested information about 2 weeks timeout on PRs: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-maintainer.html > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/contributing-ports/maintain-port.html > > > > Changes to the port will be sent to the maintainer of a port for a > review and an approval before being committed. If the maintainer does > not respond to an update request after two weeks (excluding major public > holidays), then that is considered a maintainer timeout, and the update > may be made without explicit maintainer approval. > > > > Wait > > At some stage a committer will deal with your PR. It may take minutes, > or it may take weeks - so please be patient. > > > Nothing here says 2 weeks timeout somehow should apply to assigned PRs, > in fact quite on contrary. > > In other words open and assigned PR is not equivalent of request of > approval IMHO. Imagine somebody just going to the PR database and > starting commit everything that has been in queue for more than 2 weeks. > I bet it will piss lot of people off. I always thougth the timeout policy is the same maintainer being or not a committer, PRs are automatically assigned when we are both. Personally, when i don't want nobody use timeout policy against a PR *auto-assigned* to me, i send an answer to it or just change it to analyzed, always work for me. - -- Renato Botelho GnuPG Key: http://www.FreeBSD.org/~garga/pubkey.asc I'm not under the alkafluence of inkahol that some thinkle peep I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkj9OaAACgkQ6CRbiSJE7akpLACdG/IefQboIYALKojNyC9n0MsD iWkAnijeYBL6lV/A73rrjE7Bra2RlmyV =JVyq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----