From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat May 29 03:37:40 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 586DE16A4CE; Sat, 29 May 2004 03:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-49-130.dynamic.qsc.de
	[212.202.49.130])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1E0A043D1D; Sat, 29 May 2004 03:37:40 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com)
Received: from [172.16.0.2] (helo=fillmore-labs.com)
	by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
	id 1BU1DV-00054A-9c; Sat, 29 May 2004 12:37:31 +0200
Message-ID: <40B867E8.8020808@fillmore-labs.com>
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 12:37:28 +0200
From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>
Organization: Fillmore Labs GmbH - http://www.fillmore-labs.com/
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pav@FreeBSD.org
References: <200405282158.i4SLwhJj078013@8ball.rtp.freebsd.org>
	<1085826250.41463.1.camel@hood.oook.cz>
In-Reply-To: <1085826250.41463.1.camel@hood.oook.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9
cc: FreeBSD ports <ports@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Ports with a wrong PKGORIGIN
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 10:37:40 -0000

Pav Lucistnik wrote:

> Suggestion to eik: what about mailing ports-developers@ instead of
> ports@? I read ports-developers immediately, but ports@ only once in
> a while.

I'm happy with that, since only ports committers can do something to
fix this anyway. OTOH, the same rationale that are valid for a
broken INDEX apply to PKGORIGIN and PKGVERSION: Port users might want
to know that the will run into trouble when they are trying to
update the port, and CCing ports-developers seems overambitious.


Any thoughts?

-Oliver