From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 21 18:30:43 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5C40BC5 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9637E1B9A for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t3LIUhih095015 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:30:43 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 199582] ports-mgmt/portmaster ADOPT (take MAINTAINER) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:30:43 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Only Me X-Bugzilla-Who: portmaster@bsdforge.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:30:43 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199582 --- Comment #12 from Chris Hutchinson --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #11) > (In reply to Chris Hutchinson from comment #10) > > I can *indeed* start providing patches, and will do so. In fact, I can > > post them right here. :) > > I think it would be more appropriate to post patches on the original PRs. > It keeps the topics compartmentalized and it keeps the original reporter in > the loop. > > > Speaking of being at "committer level", may I humbly request your personally > > reviewing those patches? May I also request your being my "mentor"? I can > > think of no one I feel more qualified to do so. I mean that sincerely. This > > is *NOT* "lip service"! > > So we are talking about patches to the 4000-line script, not patches to the > port that installs it, right? (which I assume is dead simple). > > I can look at patches, but they will likely be out of context and I'd have > to review the entire script to put it into context, which implies I'd have > to get intimately familiar with the internals in order to give real > feedback. In reality, if there's a reproducible problem and your patch > clearly fixes it without other regressions, chances are the patch is > correct. I'd really just see you as the primary developer at that point. > > I think it would be more realistic that you would contact someone, including > me, if you are "stuck" on how to solve a stated problem. Then you'd get > pointed in the right direction, solve it, and whatever patch you come up > with would be assumed to be correct (since it comes from the developer) Sure. It all makes perfect sense. Sorry. Thanks! --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.