From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 17 23:10:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80BD916A4CE for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 23:10:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C6743D5F for ; Mon, 17 May 2004 23:10:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id D26B2148AB; Tue, 18 May 2004 01:10:29 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 01:10:29 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: java@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: general question about java port PRs X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 06:10:30 -0000 I was surprised to find that some of the Java ports had PRs filed against them, but not under the 'ports' category, instead under the 'java' classification. As some of you may be aware, I have written a set of programs that attempt to track the status of ports PRs and correlate them with build errors seen on the build farm (among other data: see portsmon.firepipe.net). However, I only track things under 'ports', not 'java'. Shouldn't the 'java' category be reserved for such things as problems with the JDK/JREs, or would you prefer that these ports PRs be left in that category as well? mcl