Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:01:41 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ability for maintainers to update own ports Message-ID: <20031111180141.GB25898@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20031111144221.GA527@iib.unsam.edu.ar> References: <1068458390.38101.19.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110152000.622db381.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <1068471598.38101.77.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110163623.GC93583@procyon.firepipe.net> <3FB02895.5050108@ciam.ru> <20031111001932.GA95315@toxic.magnesium.net> <20031111144221.GA527@iib.unsam.edu.ar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:42:21AM -0300, Fernan Aguero wrote: > Which gets me back to the origin of this thread: should > maintainers have commit privileges for their ports? No offense, but often the answer is "no". Committers are more than just a roadblock to committing PRs, they're a sanity filter that is supposed to correct most of the errors made by maintainers with only a casual interest in the ports tree. Even though I pointed out in a previous message how many errors make it past this sanity filter and into the ports tree, I know that there are a lot more that are filtered out between what is submitted in the PR and what is committed to the tree. > little risk if the port is not perfect. In my particular > case I'm thinking in the biology stuff, because that's my > main interest. I guess that only a minority of the FreeBSD > user base would ever install one of those ports. And for > those that do, what is the potential impact of doing a > less-than-perfect port? Breaking hier(7)? In this case,=20 > the consequences of bad porting practices would impact the > port itself.=20 Broken applications degrade the overall quality of the ports collection; provide a bad model for others; cause more work for others to fix the breakage; and ultimately cause more pain for the users of the ports collection. There are up-sides, to be sure, but the down-sides are significant. Kris --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/sSQFWry0BWjoQKURAkvsAKC73zhsQhBgpsHAzzXie74P8Zr3PwCffGmj BnNe95KmSr4B3m0okBh8JGU= =mBtp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --GvXjxJ+pjyke8COw--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031111180141.GB25898>