From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 1 21:01:18 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3DD6F2C for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 21:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0E75119E for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 21:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s81L1Igd085419 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2014 21:01:18 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193211] [stage ]ports-mgmt/bxpkg request maintainership Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:01:18 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports Tree X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: portmaster@bsdforge.com X-Bugzilla-Status: Issue Resolved X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:01:19 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193211 --- Comment #5 from C Hutchinson --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #4) > After giving up asking for poudriere, I repeatedly requested output of: > > make check-plist > make stage-qa > make check-sanity > portlint > > Not once did you comply. > It's untested. > > > I don't accept redports because as we have seen many times, it does not > check gross plist errors. It's essentially worthless for staging. It's > only good to check on all platforms after staging is confirmed. > > So yes, in this context it's untested. and you didn't even give links to > redports before so...? > > If you don't provide proof, it didn't happen. > > > The other thing about this port you did not address: > It only works with pkg_* tools which were removed today, so why on earth > would you try to save it? I thought you had specific reasons for specific > ports but I cannot see any reason for this. I'm currently attempting to setup a _proper_ poudriere_ environment to accommodate all of your requests/demands. I understand that you [perhaps rightfully so] reject redports as adequate. Fair enough. But if you find/decide there are still issues with any of my submission(s). Then just say so, and mark them, as such. I'll resolve them, and things will continue to move on (ahead). As intended. IMHO I see no reason to flatly reject everything I submit. The [my] submissions are not _completely_ w/o merit. I have already vowed to resolve any outstanding issues. As history has shown, I _do_ do so. Perhaps not in your [desired] time frame. But, until I get poudriere setup properly, I am forced to do the best I can, with what I have. --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.