From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 9 17:00:00 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9011065673 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 17:00:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kamikaze@bsdforen.de) Received: from mail.bsdforen.de (bsdforen.de [212.204.60.79]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D085B8FC0A for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 16:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mobileKamikaze.norad (HSI-KBW-078-042-098-160.hsi3.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de [78.42.98.160]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.bsdforen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0EBF8A21A1 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 2010 18:59:41 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C37557D.8030004@bsdforen.de> Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:59:41 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-GB; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100627 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <4C374B3E.90704@bsdforen.de> <20100709185003.5b902534@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <20100709185003.5b902534@ernst.jennejohn.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Solutions for the PR load problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:00:00 -0000 On 09/07/2010 18:50, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 18:15:58 +0200 > Dominic Fandrey wrote: > >> Currently the PR load is obviously too high for the committer team >> to deal with. From a maintainer perspective this is rather painful, >> I have currently stopped updating all my ports, because I want >> pending updates committed first and also want to avoid running into >> PR dependencies (ioquake3, openarena and iourbanterror are >> examples in my case). >> > > Are you aware that the ports tree was in freeze/slush for the 8.1 > release? This was just lifted. > > Not much happens when that's the case. I'm not sweeping talking about sweeping commits and the problem has become apparent months ago. And while the number of ports is steadily increasing, the number of commits appears to be declining slightly. -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?