From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 4 07:15:08 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E31E51065695; Fri, 4 Feb 2011 07:15:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from antoine@nagafix.co.uk) Received: from mail.nagafix.co.uk (mamba.nagafix.co.uk [194.145.196.68]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA6FE8FC08; Fri, 4 Feb 2011 07:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: antoine@nagafix.co.uk) by mail.nagafix.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 976879B0C; Fri, 4 Feb 2011 07:15:06 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4D4BA777.2030701@nagafix.co.uk> Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 14:15:03 +0700 From: Antoine Martin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Steve Wills References: <4D4B0CDB.9000404@nagafix.co.uk> <4D4B400A.2090701@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4D4B400A.2090701@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: xpra-0.0.7.16p4 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, 04 Feb 2011 07:15:09 -0000 On 02/04/2011 06:53 AM, Steve Wills wrote: > On 02/03/11 15:15, Antoine Martin wrote: >> Hi there, > >> I only just noticed that you've added a port for xpra. >> I wasn't aware of that and you're pointing to the source on my server, >> so I guess that it means I have to be careful not to remove it from now on? > > The files should eventually get automatically mirrored to the FreeBSD > ftp server at ftp.freebsd.org (and it's mirrors), so worst case users > get it from there, but it's always nice to get it from the originator. > OK, I normally move old source releases to /old/ eventually. I guess I can still do that as long as the port file has been updated to use the newer source snapshots? Is it ok to remove source for out-of-date port files like that? Or is this frowned upon? Is there a policy at all? >> In the future, a simple notification email could prevent me from >> breaking stuff unintentionally. > > Noted. I only used that source because it compiled properly (due to your > changes), which the source hosted at Google Code didn't. I can mirror a > copy on my server and point users to that if you like. Upstream seems very slow at merging fixes and enhancements, not sure why. I don't have any problems with ports pointing to my server. :) >> FYI: the current version in: >> http://winswitch.org/src/ >> is 0.0.7.17-1 and it fixes a number of bugs, you should probably bump >> the port to this version. > > I'll work on that, thanks for the heads up. I hadn't seen a notice to > the parti-discuss list, which is where I saw your source originally. Hah, ok. Since upstream doesn't merge fixes very often, I don't always post updated patches there. I'll make sure to ping you from now on if you like. This normally coincides with a winswitch release, that I post here: http://lists.devloop.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/shifter-users >> One question: what would I have to do to get winswitch also into ports? >> It's trivial to install compared to xpra (as it's pure python), but it >> would still be nicer for users to get it all directly from ports. > > It would just take someone writing a port for it and submitting it. I > will work on that, but if you beat me to it I won't be offended. Great, keep me posted, I may yet find the time to look into it. (it's been on my todo list for over a year now..) Thanks! Antoine > > Thanks for the info! > > Steve