From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Dec 19 19:22:15 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD8CECFA;
 Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:22:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B535A1035;
 Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:22:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (ip70-178-7-237.ks.ks.cox.net [70.178.7.237])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E980E43600;
 Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:22:03 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <52B3474A.7090803@marino.st>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:21:46 +0100
From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS,
 I'm unsubscribing
References: <52B0D149.5020308@marino.st> <52B343FE.4070808@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <52B343FE.4070808@FreeBSD.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:22:15 -0000

On 12/19/2013 20:07, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> 
> I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept
> their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has
> build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@ shouldn't
> either. It tells everyone that "yes" there is a problem with this port
> and "it's not just me".


What can I say?  I think pasting an error log, and only an error log, is
"quite rude".  But I'm also serious -- if this is the official response
(and seeing that you are a member of portmgr, that makes it pretty close
to official), then I'll follow through and simply unsubscribe from the
list.  If FreeBSD isn't going to enforce their own procedures and use of
infrastructure, I will limit my exposure to the continuing anarchy and
let "customer service" to those that agree that ports@ is a free-for-all.

John