Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2010 09:48:46 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: "Klaus T. Aehlig" <aehlig@linta.de> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: updates to pending new ports Message-ID: <4B45ADFE.8020106@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100107083447.GA21194@schoenfinkel.linta.de> References: <20100107083447.GA21194@schoenfinkel.linta.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig0F6EA1EAEA02C19985BDBF8D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Klaus T. Aehlig wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> Recently, I submitted PR ports/141674 suggesting a port for the uzbl
> web browser. Given the current holiday season, I'm not surprised that
> it is still unassigned. On the other hand, upstream has developped
> further, and I wonder if I'm right in submitting updated versions of
> this port as followups to the PR. (My thoughts went along the lines=20
> "If it's still unassigned, then probably no committer has spent any=20
> time on it; so when it gets assigned to a commiter, (s)he might as well=
> look at a port for the latest version".) Or should I consider the
> fact that the PR is unassigned as a sign that this port is
> probably not interesting for FreeBSD?
>=20
> [Since I'm using that browser on my private machine, I'm updating
> the port anyway, so it's no extra work for me to submit follow
> ups. I'm just wondering whether this is what I'm supposed to do,
> or just considered annoying.]
It's certainly better to submit updates by following up on an already ope=
n
ticket, rather than creating a whole raft of new tickets.
Updating your port before it is committed does indicate a certain degree =
of=20
commitment to keeping the port up to date, which is a good thing.
You can't really assume anything about the status of your submission if i=
t
is still unassigned. All that really means is that no one has yet taken
responsibility for checking and committing it. If there were any questio=
ns
as to whether the port should be added to the tree at all, then they woul=
d be
coming to you from the committer that had assigned the PR to themselves. =
If
your new port has been languishing unassigned for a long time (I'd say a =
few
weeks at least), it's legitimate to ask about its status on this list -- =
as
you say, submitting the port during the holiday season may well have slip=
ped
it under the radar of anyone that might work on it.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
--------------enig0F6EA1EAEA02C19985BDBF8D
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEAREIAAYFAktFrgQACgkQ8Mjk52CukIzpUACeLD6OK5vZNN8vL2ta9i/R/d9n
SGoAoI85rtg+rLDz3jpgR7tIq7BFYGbB
=Pcoe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enig0F6EA1EAEA02C19985BDBF8D--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B45ADFE.8020106>