From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Sat Jan 19 22:16:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13C41496349; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 22:16:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mat@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8542671645; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 22:16:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mat@FreeBSD.org) Received: from atuin.in.mat.cc (unknown [IPv6:2a01:678:42:ffff:3e15:c2ff:fec4:452e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: mat/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9B556FE9C; Sat, 19 Jan 2019 22:16:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mat@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 23:15:59 +0100 From: Mathieu Arnold To: Jan Beich Cc: Mathieu Arnold , ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r490569 - in head/graphics: mesa-dri mesa-dri/files mesa-libs Message-ID: <20190119221559.nkky4mnz7jxqfdjy@atuin.in.mat.cc> References: <201901171534.x0HFYbZ8087462@repo.freebsd.org> <20190119102012.olepcljgxtstrz7i@atuin.in.mat.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lzlnk2nfrtwwdggv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8542671645 X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.87 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.87)[-0.870,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 22:16:04 -0000 --lzlnk2nfrtwwdggv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 03:02:05PM +0100, Jan Beich wrote: > Mathieu Arnold writes: >=20 > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 03:34:37PM +0000, Jan Beich wrote: > > > >> Approved by: maintainer timeout (2 weeks after 2019Q1) > > > > portmgr hat on. > > > > Maintainer timeout means the maintainer never said anything. In this > > case, the maintainers clearly told you NO repeatedly, see comments 3, 5, > > 9, and also by the maintainer setting explicitely > > "maintainer-feedback-". >=20 > In bug 233034 comment 1 said there was a dicision to wait for 2019Q1. > I've asked how to interpret this in comment 2, and comment 3 elaborated. > I've pinged the team in comment 6 but got no response for 2 weeks. Given > the silence, the decision to land in 2019Q1 and positive call for testing > I've landed the patch, assuming responsibility for any regressions. >=20 > Bug 230298 was obsoleted by bug 233034. I guess, landing it separately > led to a confusion. Even there the maintainer's feedback wasn't as > simple as NO: the alleged regressions turned out to be known issues, > wait until after EuroBSDCon became obsolete, maintainer-feedback- > was a misuse of the flag, lack of testing was covered by call for testing, > testing protocol never materialized, that bug was the place where the > coordination happened, etc. >=20 > Before opening the can of worms I wish you've waited for maintainer's > response if I did anything wrong when applying the timeout. Funny you'd say that, I only opened that can of worms because the maintainers complained that it was not the first time you committed stuff to the graphics stack without waiting for maintainer approval. So, let me repeat. Do not, ever again, commit to a port maintained by x11@ without their explicit approval, and I mean, someone saying, in a PR "ok, please commit". > > When the maintainer says NO, it does not mean you have to wait 2 weeks > > to update the port, it means you absolutely will not, ever, commit the > > patch. >=20 > In that case, can you document maintainers can stall patches however long > they want and "not exclusive ownership" is actually false? >=20 > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-maintainer= =2Ehtml The maintainer said "NO", three times to you in that PR. Yes, a maintainer can delay, or refuse your patches. If that is not clear enough, I am not sure what could be. --=20 Mathieu Arnold --lzlnk2nfrtwwdggv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQKTBAABCgB9FiEEOraXidLtEhBkQLpbOkUW81GDzkgFAlxDoZ9fFIAAAAAALgAo aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldDNB QjY5Nzg5RDJFRDEyMTA2NDQwQkE1QjNBNDUxNkYzNTE4M0NFNDgACgkQOkUW81GD zkgTWxAAisHcNx1YbPvpea6sItcWRTf41HPjlB5D1pHStdGvaso9LMqizcbk+1t9 JDRxf07szznJc08UI2gTUnWbVgvZaWIFzmDMr4RcRjTu3vlM46uNM97PnFIpt+D5 ynkRtY7oyxwKF0a3TLbkqK6A4QIm0jDqSciQNpdWr8Cf77eutvl+gG3Q8vIg04PA tDuhaK9rzXyCGYNmqrL35e/ZInF2sDOWC3Pla507JO923iaI2qMeggpf3hyC9x5P 5lwJAC9hyDkif2/WqUFxmJykpxxtabNvSqvBM/XZ0sdcWdDsZTqWNHqeJMszxqQm z+tAPHjZeMLLUz/DMBEPxDuwpRP/osyP8EgRG3FLGIw8QAfRTGFQGcc0BXNXBpTs w+NhOTK3EA4IE8RbLCLu8j//EQr8Iu4wjiNnLf1p+NMKHx9sSPuY1P1rYs5LkKUa Mk8DELGWelKTawYJWakEUBjgodY2wnXREneQeZNtGTv2Kp4va8clBfp+jKp+W+Ty gbOtWICKIEs/+hczqzUN7NDcecl/JL7NJg4UpnS+DnzWwOj1a/+Z0mRqIOo/W5Fm bT9y7FojHbG0dQPyS8kUPXSPMSpswZMuE6TYRs+ajGvj2vCertZ3QRIioGJ4zJGX bCEVKIwYwxdaN2CsPfeeT1t59gOw2eeYIlQt1Xu7MZmNNYQB51A= =AMHw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --lzlnk2nfrtwwdggv--