From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar  4 12:34:10 2014
Return-Path: <owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
 id 6F0F1CDB; Tue,  4 Mar 2014 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:34:10 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r344316 - in head/net-mgmt: .
 p5-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk p5-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk/files
Message-ID: <20140304123410.GA86186@FreeBSD.org>
References: <CAD5bB+iER-D3DzbwwDa_MASmhX75v=9B0VG_=MPNL+FWAmD3Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140304112710.GA63353@FreeBSD.org>
 <0121329AE40C04B85EBA0ACC@ogg.in.absolight.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0121329AE40C04B85EBA0ACC@ogg.in.absolight.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org>,
 svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Andrej Zverev <az@freebsd.org>,
 ports-committers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head
 <svn-ports-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-ports-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-ports-head>,
 <mailto:svn-ports-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 12:34:10 -0000

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:24:36PM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
> +--On 4 mars 2014 11:27:10 +0000 Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> | I recall the rule was about that newly added ports should not be
> | maintained by ports@.  Meta-entities like x11@, perl@, python@, etc. make
> | sense, and I don't see a problem here (if a port in question is ineeded
> | of such a broad interest and/or importance).
> 
> I do, perl@ is a handful of committers, on the top of my head, az, crees,
> culot, sunpoet and myself, those are allowed to set the maintainer to
> perl@. [...]
> 
> When we got perl@ created way back when, the idea was to have a team for
> important Perl stuff, not for maintaining the whole of CPAN.

Fair enough; I followed up mostly on the submitter != maintainer question;
I did not mean to imply that perl@ should be or is sorta like ports@. ;-)

./danfe