From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 13 10:19:01 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9026716A4CE; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:19:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from tatiana.utanet.at (tatiana.utanet.at [213.90.36.46]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D98843D53; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 10:19:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from josef@daemon.li) Received: from plenty.utanet.at ([213.90.36.9]) by tatiana.utanet.at with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgT7y-0005CD-00; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:18:58 +0100 Received: from dsl-30-9.utaonline.at ([81.189.30.9] helo=jenny.daemon.li) by plenty.utanet.at with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgT7y-0002I1-00; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:18:58 +0100 Received: by jenny.daemon.li (Postfix, from userid 1005) id 6A0922F2; Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:19:11 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 19:19:11 +0100 From: Josef El-Rayes To: "Jonathan T. Sage" Message-ID: <20040113181911.GB432@jenny.daemon.li> References: <20040113093903.GA84055@mimoza.pantel.net> <400409F4.3090205@freebsd.org> <400428DC.2060108@theatre.msu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <400428DC.2060108@theatre.msu.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Reply-Path: josef@daemon.li X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.9-STABLE cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status reports - why not regularly? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: josef@daemon.li List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 18:19:01 -0000 --CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Jonathan T. Sage" wrote: > 1. a lot of the commits are going to be ports related, and=20 > therefore dropped immediatally. this sort of report is handled=20 > wonderfully by dan @ freshports, i see no reason to duplicate=20 > what he has done why excluding ports? i think important changes in the ports area should be covered here too.=20 -josef --CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD) iQEVAwUBQAQ2n1nFItmnnbU8AQJFvwf/U6cJzOysX+GTmIViDppevmu4+J/7dBph QaUwge7PAoBTUYALp2U0zCxQEqHj2dBVCO3+VU9RLUmZoz6v2Wr8ZAdCMMgHoniz OkuXXbTUGEWbg+IW5V5os5MI2hn9+GR3wwEuo22La/qxuKNiqaC0LD033BI9pYcC 4/P753g0QXOmwC06DQ5znAYbZZHmeWAbXWNzPKRVKfwNyMUIFqNQ5KprFMhr1RIm fkwewcoOV+hGtCCWylape1cjUKw9XNicXNzGC4hYpBmJu3eC9xc2OWbnXekD4IsV 24VixhxQSnw9szzRVysYpEx37ks24pzXA9IKluQ77IWe291Ur4a9/g== =H2TM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --CUfgB8w4ZwR/yMy5--