From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 26 13:35:44 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9524776F for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailout.easydns.com (mailout.easydns.com [64.68.200.141]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FBE417F0 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout.easydns.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BA8C12F5E1 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 08:37:07 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mailout.easydns.com Received: from mailout.easydns.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailout.easydns.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7brqlyO1YlyK for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 08:37:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ares.hayers.org (cpc20-tilb7-2-0-cust491.20-1.cable.virginm.net [82.34.211.236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout.easydns.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E964E12F4BE for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 08:37:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from ares.hayers.org (ares.hayers.org [127.0.0.1]) by ares.hayers.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A41B05864 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:37 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: HCF-Sophos-SpamAssassin at hayers.org Received: from ares.hayers.org ([127.0.0.1]) by ares.hayers.org (ares.hayers.org [127.0.0.1]) (HCF-Sophos-SpamAssassin, port 10024) with ESMTP id z7LguKOBCU83 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.8.2] (zeus.hayers.org [192.168.8.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: gary) by ares.hayers.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68E18B06F97 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:24 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <52E50F33.6080307@hayers.org> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:47 +0000 From: "Gary J. Hayers" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? References: <52E2FA36.5080106@marino.st> <52E303CB.6020304@marino.st> <52E30990.2060903@marino.st> <52E398FF.9000300@FreeBSD.org> <52E50DBA.4010807@hayers.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 13:35:44 -0000 On 26/01/2014 13:32, Big Lebowski wrote: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary J. Hayers wrote: >>Suspect this would work, however, the more committers the less the quality >> of work? > Is there any evidence to support that argument? Or is it just a fear of > that? At any point if that happens, then this can be revoked, the selection > can be tighter, things can be adjusted, nothing is written in stone. Also, > people were mentioning existing commiters to be sloppy and problematic, > we've months of waiting for PR's to be taken care of, and there are still > ports accepted that dont work at all - is that this work quality we're so > troubled for? > > B. That's a fear admittedly, but your solution would take care of that, would that also mean a bigger portmgr team too? -- Regards, Gary J. Hayers gary@hayers.org PGP Signature http://www.hayers.org/pgp