From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jun 4 14: 8: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from server1.mich.com (server1.mich.com [198.108.16.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 661AC37B50B; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 14:08:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@almanac.yi.org) Received: from almanac.yi.org (pm001-025.dialup.bignet.net [64.79.80.25]) by server1.mich.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA14759; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 17:07:58 -0400 Received: by almanac.yi.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B56801946; Sun, 4 Jun 2000 17:07:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2000 17:07:06 -0400 From: Will Andrews To: "David O'Brien" Cc: Will Andrews , FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Porter's Handbook category violations Message-ID: <20000604170706.J1993@argon.gryphonsoft.com> References: <20000601232048.K32212@argon.gryphonsoft.com> <20000603215053.B65314@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20000603215053.B65314@dragon.nuxi.com>; from obrien@FreeBSD.org on Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 09:50:53PM -0700 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 09:50:53PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > These are not in violation. They belongs in net plain and simple. There Okay, if they belong in net, they can stay in net. > is no rule about listing security as a second category. Yes, there is. See the following URL: http://www.FreeBSD.org/porters-handbook/x2203.html > In addition, IMHO the rule you are quoting here should be a guideline and > not hard. I'm not sure everyone agrees fully with the statement you are > quoting. Well, perhaps.. -- Will Andrews GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message