Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:42:15 +0000 From: Tim Bishop <tim-lists@bishnet.net> To: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: ports/58260: New Port: print/lilypond-devel Message-ID: <20031117004215.GB5555@carrick.bishnet.net> In-Reply-To: <3FB8182F.50000@fillmore-labs.com> References: <20031019233208.80051.qmail@mail.frobs.net> <20031116191222.GA30181@mail.webmonster.de> <20031116214023.GA16310@xor.obsecurity.org> <3FB80FB3.5090205@ciam.ru> <20031117001330.GA18934@xor.obsecurity.org> <3FB8182F.50000@fillmore-labs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 17, 2003 at 01:37:03AM +0100, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >It's great to see enthusiasm for the new "portrookies" project, but at > >the moment most committers are not using it, so unless the new version > >of your port is available in gnats most committers will not find it. > > You have to start somewhere. Tell us how we can improve portrookies so > that it will be easier for committers to get the ports. > > One idea that popped up was downloadable shar files/diffs and to post > just the url to gnats, but hey, the project is one and a half day old... What about the differences between a port that's a rookie, and a real port. For example, they have a different (or extra) category, and a PKGNAMEPREFIX. So even if a committer did want to pull it straight out of the portrookie CVS repository, they'd have to munge it before merging it in to the freebsd ports tree. Tim. -- Tim Bishop http://www.bishnet.net/tim PGP Key: 0x5AE7D984
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031117004215.GB5555>