From nobody Sun Jan 21 09:46:29 2024 X-Original-To: dev-commits-ports-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4THpQm45tGz574ml; Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:46:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+t@virtual-estates.net) Received: from symbion.zaytman.com (symbion.zaytman.com [64.112.176.10]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "symbion", Issuer "Narawntapu" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4THpQm1YNcz46h0; Sun, 21 Jan 2024 09:46:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+t@virtual-estates.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from aldan.narawntapu (pool-100-1-252-187.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net [100.1.252.187]) by symbion.zaytman.com (8.17.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 40L9kTH6089617 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:46:30 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mi+t@virtual-estates.net) X-Authentication-Warning: symbion.zaytman.com: Host pool-100-1-252-187.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net [100.1.252.187] claimed to be aldan.narawntapu Received: from [192.168.1.10] (aldan [192.168.1.10]) by aldan.narawntapu (8.17.2/8.17.1) with ESMTP id 40L9kTkQ047004; Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:46:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from mi+t@virtual-estates.net) X-Authentication-Warning: aldan.narawntapu: Host aldan [192.168.1.10] claimed to be [192.168.1.10] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------1oKAV0WwIo07SqnErV6BFLoC" Message-ID: <7e07375b-32bc-4778-8977-d87d6e135679@virtual-estates.net> Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2024 04:46:29 -0500 List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the ports repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-ports-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: git: b430a140c818 - main - net-im/purple-gowhatsapp: add WhatsApp plugin for libpurple Content-Language: en-US To: Mathieu Arnold Cc: Daniel Engberg , ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org References: <202401202030.40KKUApC045320@gitrepo.freebsd.org> From: "Mikhail T." In-Reply-To: X-DCC-www.nova53.net-Metrics: aldan.narawntapu 1204; bulk rep Body=5 Fuz1=5 Fuz2=5 rep=43% X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=23.7 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, HTML_MESSAGE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on aldan.narawntapu X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4THpQm1YNcz46h0 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[t]; ASN(0.00)[asn:394548, ipnet:64.112.176.0/24, country:US] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1oKAV0WwIo07SqnErV6BFLoC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 21.01.24 02:04, Mathieu Arnold: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 07:30:55PM -0500, Mikhail T. wrote: >> But why would you want it backed out?! > Because you added a port that does not build. That's not a reason to back it out even if it really failed due to some mistake on my part. I made such mistakes before. But this time, as I pointed out already, the failure is due to some firewall rule on the build cluster. None of the thing Daniel pointed out caused the failure to build. It is a firewall rule. Setting DEVELOPER does not warn about it either. > The FreeBSD ports tree is not your own ports tree where you add things to see if they build. It certainly is not "my own", but what's wrong with "adding things to see if they build"? > You have to ... > You must use ... > You must also ... Would you mind pointing the rules and the bylaws, that you allege I violated? Are they spelled out somewhere? Nothing I'm able to find is worded anywhere as strongly as "must". > If you are not willing to do those basic things everyone else is doing, then please do not push changes yourself and only submit PR so that someone else can run those tests. When a change has a potential to affect the work of others, I do that. See PR 276204 for the most recent example. But this was simply a new port. If it failed, no one is any worse off, than if it didn't exist at all. And yet, you're coming down on me like I ruined your day (or an even  longer time-period). Please, take care of your own demons privately. Thank you. Yours, -mi --------------1oKAV0WwIo07SqnErV6BFLoC Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
21.01.24 02:04, Mathieu Arnold:
On Sat, Jan 20, 2024 at 07:30:55PM -0500, Mikhail T. wrote:

But why would you want it backed out?!

Because you added a port that does not build.

That's not a reason to back it out even if it really failed due to some mistake on my part. I made such mistakes before.

But this time, as I pointed out already, the failure is due to some firewall rule on the build cluster.

None of the thing Daniel pointed out caused the failure to build. It is a firewall rule. Setting DEVELOPER does not warn about it either.

The FreeBSD ports tree is not your own ports tree where you add things to see if they build.
It certainly is not "my own", but what's wrong with "adding things to see if they build"?
You have to ...
You must use ...
You must also ...
Would you mind pointing the rules and the bylaws, that you allege I violated? Are they spelled out somewhere? Nothing I'm able to find is worded anywhere as strongly as "must".
If you are not willing to do those basic things everyone else is doing, then please do not push changes yourself and only submit PR so that someone else can run those tests.

When a change has a potential to affect the work of others, I do that. See PR 276204 for the most recent example. But this was simply a new port. If it failed, no one is any worse off, than if it didn't exist at all. And yet, you're coming down on me like I ruined your day (or an even  longer time-period). Please, take care of your own demons privately. Thank you. Yours,

-mi

--------------1oKAV0WwIo07SqnErV6BFLoC--