From owner-cvs-all Tue May 22 17: 8:14 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from bazooka.unixfreak.org (bazooka.unixfreak.org [63.198.170.138]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1677B37B42C; Tue, 22 May 2001 17:08:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dima@unixfreak.org) Received: from spike.unixfreak.org (spike [63.198.170.139]) by bazooka.unixfreak.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9FDA3E28; Tue, 22 May 2001 17:08:00 -0700 (PDT) To: John Baldwin Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, Josef Karthauser Subject: Re: cvs commit: CVSROOT cfg.pm In-Reply-To: ; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on "Tue, 22 May 2001 16:54:05 -0700 (PDT)" Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 17:08:00 -0700 From: Dima Dorfman Message-Id: <20010523000800.B9FDA3E28@bazooka.unixfreak.org> Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG John Baldwin writes: > > On 22-May-01 Dima Dorfman wrote: > > Josef Karthauser writes: > >> joe 2001/05/22 16:18:11 PDT > >> > >> Modified files: > >> . cfg.pm > >> Log: > >> Revert to the previous behaviour of not sending mail on directory > >> creation. > >> > >> Note to FreeBSD committers: do we want this on? > > > > I don't think it's a very good idea. Think of ports. People already > > don't like that there are two commits for every new port (the port > > itself and CVSROOT/modules); this would raise that number to three or > > four (the dir(s) for the port, the port, and modules). > > What if it was just for the other trees then and not ports? Fine by me; I have no problem pushing 'D' a couple of extra times a week. I just wanted to point out that we probably couldn't do it for ports/ without raising a lot of objections. Dima Dorfman dima@unixfreak.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message