Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 07:05:45 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler <eadler@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/s9fes Makefile Message-ID: <20111116070545.GA1241@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20111116064943.GA26691@lonesome.com> References: <201111160321.pAG3LYf3033418@repoman.freebsd.org> <20111116044411.GA57332@FreeBSD.org> <20111116064943.GA26691@lonesome.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:49:43AM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:44:11AM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > Oh come on. Why blindly mark ports as -jX unsafe when trivial fix is > > discoverable in a minute? > > Send patches. Perhaps you didn't notice, but the patch was attached. My point, however, was to bring attention to the fact that lots of committers' resources are literally wasted on PR processing and maintainer email chit-chat only to commit something that does not solve the problem, but masks it out. Submitters should not be blindly trusted (with a few notable exceptions). Lots of them do not know how to deal with build issues properly. That's our responsibility to analyse every submission and to see if proposed fix is indeed the right one. ./danfe
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111116070545.GA1241>