From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 24 09:48:27 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10E8D16A4CE; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:48:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A0643FE3; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:48:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id C8645140AA; Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:48:24 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:48:24 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: Trevor Johnson In-Reply-To: <20031124094632.R26448@blues.jpj.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Mathieu Arnold cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org cc: dwcjr@freebsd.org cc: portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/59599: Update add conflicts to the samba-* ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:48:27 -0000 > David Chapman is taking time off from FreeBSD. I would be willing to > commit this if it's approved by him and portmgr. While it's eminently fair for anyone to take time off FreeBSD (this is, after all, a volunteer project!), it's somewhat awkward to have someone who is doing so, maintaining a high-profile port like this one. There are a number of PRs filed against it. Having said that, David has been polite and prompt in replying to my own emails (about the PRs' states -- implying that several of them are older and should just be closed, but I myself don't know enough about samba to know what's what and thus close them myself). But perhaps I could suggest that David might want to hand this port one off to someone who is more actively developing, using samba on FreeBSD, right now? This is not meant as anything personal, it's more out of concern for those PRs (which one of my ports monitoring reports consistently highlights :-) ) mcl