From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 24 04:01:08 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DAA1065680 for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 04:01:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: from mail-ob0-f182.google.com (mail-ob0-f182.google.com [209.85.214.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43458FC0A for ; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 04:01:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbun3 with SMTP id un3so5591586obb.13 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:01:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eitanadler.com; s=0xdeadbeef; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=CB4JwyX/B7omOaCe60NCF4vYhqwp8eyTkvqNaZe0Rpk=; b=rwFUUOKR4FNgCEfKr6BLopDjRGqHY0r3nVIopNb5lDTAKC+gJnuzOEJgeeGg3V08lJ goNVR+kGFnSHb5LjWQagj4SBAHFufqCecuAhhA6dMov7JhbeqlWyD6G9CivhrzICIeMl P6ouc1goz98RZ8xuSOx+vRTuIt8p9kqFhI+HY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=CB4JwyX/B7omOaCe60NCF4vYhqwp8eyTkvqNaZe0Rpk=; b=PxwwR2queGXyZku5quiFcFvxfZqsNrSuJzk9eokxpNODY3FQP3x8K+YNuhdbd5tdqc lbtA+yrE9MNw6BZ4ojbmPdiSdWgOstdF4cETEDdfhN4Q/eenFd/jxaiPo7g8+h8/QCo0 9LTg+4Zf3XEhyTfdOpg0nWeDt9iuw9/PYG8LTEHHk8BGutY1MwBruPtayL8eUzUZJeo5 9RsjgKTDWw8o7EYUOflFbts9uFcPpAQMQhV01sktVmeHssycNovk1NHMd4ja++7OpN4W wC5tp4P08Obwa5xVCQo4IWVaqEeRrpXMsGVE5wqkvQXjy8y89pYCoaDLEDPtuuUKuG3H APTQ== Received: by 10.60.3.39 with SMTP id 7mr7758073oez.4.1340510467089; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:01:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.125.70 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:00:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FE67152.8080008@FreeBSD.org> References: <4FE2315C.50706@FreeBSD.org> <4FE2F673.2080201@FreeBSD.org> <4FE518FB.1000802@FreeBSD.org> <4FE566CB.406@FreeBSD.org> <4FE67152.8080008@FreeBSD.org> From: Eitan Adler Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 21:00:36 -0700 Message-ID: To: Doug Barton , Ports Management Team Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQn2OfjFVNwo3achFCM1K4mzh5ZBgK//znfzfmrfxsSIlXsVZkUI4EivdnIyCMa0I5ugJkvj Cc: gnome@freebsd.org, Andriy Gapon Subject: Re: irc/xchat: limit icon blinking time X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 04:01:08 -0000 Adding portmgr here to cc: should we accept new patches which add additional features or fix upstream bugs, not specific to us, as local FreeBSD ports trees patches? On 23 June 2012 18:45, Doug Barton wrote: > Several of my ports, to start with. Which is why I'm concerned at your > attempt to change policy by fiat. I'm not attempting to change anything. FWIW, why don't you upstream the patches in your ports? >> Our own stuff is completely unrelated. The question at hand is do we >> continue development of third party software by means of patches to >> the ports tree? >> And the answer has always been, "Yes." I have no idea where you got any > other idea. As I understand it the answer has always been no: we don't continue development of third party software in ports more than necessary to make it function on FreeBSD. -- Eitan Adler