Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 13:09:00 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> To: v@fatpipi.com Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, Pietro Cerutti <gahr@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/textproc/xqilla Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <20100716130900.GA54493@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin-cQb%2ByfRbt-k1tXdrVo%2B=7o__CQCRHYep0rwu@mail.gmail.com> References: <201007161014.o6GAEB34018093@repoman.freebsd.org> <AANLkTin-cQb%2ByfRbt-k1tXdrVo%2B=7o__CQCRHYep0rwu@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 08:08:43PM +0800, Vanilla Hsu wrote: > xqilla 2.2.4 required xerces-c version 3.x, that's why i did not commit this > pr. Which in turn raises these questions: - Why PR number was not referenced in the commit log? (148273) - Why didn't you (vanilla@) added the requirement for new xerces in audit log, and/or marked the PR as analyzed or pending feedback? - If 2.2.4 is totally broken with current xerces-c, how is that possible at all that this got committed? It suggests that no required run-time testing was done, if even build fails. Am I missing something, or things got really bad here? ./danfe > > 2010/7/16 Pietro Cerutti <gahr@freebsd.org> > > > gahr 2010-07-16 10:14:11 UTC > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > Modified files: > > textproc/xqilla Makefile distinfo > > Log: > > - Update to 2.2.4 > > > > Approved by: maintainer (timeout after 15 days)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100716130900.GA54493>