From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 18 10:47:01 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDB72C17; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-x232.google.com (mail-we0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AFBD1135; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:47:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u57so7388836wes.9 for ; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 02:46:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=m6jnA2FpqI5P4nw0wuErArGOKRV3CXAEwtX0MbxIack=; b=OgPSepMXF/tLJDH3W9pWalolyiAbWE/RhiuA0zndvDeVyDAHnYIbyIMGFO2/Glmbt4 wbQvRYC4zCScWHYFyaMBnEOfRjPdRP1M/u7b2aLO35ahc/KCFuyaRYCKR6WTW4MoCg7z tWvB4puLdj1tr/mfpMZ/1TGWoiKSml8a+Ban2BDXiBBtm25wagZXoCdFiP3iurf5aJEN hS+1qVmLkoc1AJap94+TW2leIHTHL7WFS0gNsYicXQpWO+fPDWmtbYI+O3hNrQsFDOHk ihAIcLc9ZEnrcjyCKuOE7WqAvStB799eaYHNh+S0+UjkQUHCJ9b53H+xTmAloH6jG27i uN+g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.109.201 with SMTP id hu9mr7277076wib.59.1387363618564; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 02:46:58 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.71.18 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Dec 2013 02:46:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52B0D149.5020308@marino.st> References: <52B0D149.5020308@marino.st> Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 11:46:58 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm unsubscribing From: David Demelier To: marino@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:47:01 -0000 2013/12/17 John Marino : > Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and > mail it to ports@, usually without even saying "hello". I've tried to > discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage > this method of bypassing writing PRs. One user even proudly boasted > that sending email to ports@ is faster than writing a PR so of course he > was going to do that instead. > > If this kind of post is acceptable to the rest of the people here, and > I'm alone in not only finding it very rude, but also making the volume > of ports@ too high, then please tell me that the problem is with me. > > If nothing is going to change, I am going to unsubscribe from ports@ > list. The gcc developers on gcc@gcc.gnu.org always tell a poster when a > post in appropriate for that list and as a result and as a result the > posters usually only make a mistake once. I'd like to see something > closer to that, but if the list isn't going to be policed then it's too > noisy for me. > > John I agree on some points. However, sometimes users asks why it does not compile because it can come from their installations. It's quite true, a port "should" compile if not it should be marked as BROKEN. I personally prefer to ask to the list when it does not compiles because it can comes from me. For instance I asked for virtualbox because I didn't see any other complaint nor PRs and since it compiles from my system and not poudriere I thought I did something wrong. And for that purpose I think that we should not spam the GNATS where problems can appear at the user side first. But for me, I often starts my mails by Hello :-). Regards, -- Demelier David