From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 18 06:57:29 2009 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 5545D106568B for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:57:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (lefty.soaustin.net [66.135.55.46]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F3F8FC20 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:57:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 9DB218C080; Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:57:28 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 00:57:28 -0600 From: Mark Linimon To: Dominic Fandrey Message-ID: <20091218065728.GC29158@lonesome.com> References: <4B2A52DB.5020602@bsdforen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4B2A52DB.5020602@bsdforen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ioquake3 support more platforms 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, 18 Dec 2009 06:57:29 -0000 On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 04:48:43PM +0100, Dominic Fandrey wrote: > A committer explained to me that he doesn't want to deal with SVN > snapshot based ports. Is that a common attitude and what should > I do to remedy this? Well, the problem is that we (FreeBSD) can't guarantee whether the contents of a resulting package are secure or not, or really, what the contents are at all. I personally would only be comfortable with a default setting of NO_PACKAGE in this case. Individual users could manually override it. I don't know if there is a formal policy about such ports. Probably, there ought to be. mcl