From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 26 14:05:07 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E02AD45 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:05:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-x234.google.com (mail-qc0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45AFA19AC for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:05:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id i17so6688958qcy.39 for ; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 06:05:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=/P5p+cFlx1owr1OL6uvm8kC2LEceAjEb7h5/iEYW4Ls=; b=B+KjATHi09dUZcy5RThDr5UI7a1ySfxJf1LtWINGL6WFXVwlHXxWfquVBBRAl0wVcI 8GwcQJTyDh+dW1SkcAYwxiuqQsdahIJdm2HdYx7Pgy1H3bK7/IDBkqVO9pj3tMH9I2mZ 6DinX2/tGbr+pKAcWNTnOUpPw7YrsWGBSkEAZRelUCCMtfIv4WIORRZB03KpiUqIsVU8 5vULs4TbaPyOrterhTASUsnhq4sWVfXH7KdEpozV6PjdmqFKhAGQmfjgU69/odvESjHv PBe/UHm9GYCcsy2ChS6rU9WrpG6t+biFu1vQ/RWs2GafuxlHx1IZL3Q9vFq2wkNIsFwO LTbQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.89.241 with SMTP id v104mr33798777qgd.27.1390745106490; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 06:05:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.229.208.202 with HTTP; Sun, 26 Jan 2014 06:05:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E50F33.6080307@hayers.org> References: <52E2FA36.5080106@marino.st> <52E303CB.6020304@marino.st> <52E30990.2060903@marino.st> <52E398FF.9000300@FreeBSD.org> <52E50DBA.4010807@hayers.org> <52E50F33.6080307@hayers.org> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 15:05:06 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays? From: Big Lebowski To: "Gary J. Hayers" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 Cc: freebsd-ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2014 14:05:07 -0000 On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Gary J. Hayers wrote: > > > On 26/01/2014 13:32, Big Lebowski wrote: > >> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary J. Hayers wrote: >> >>> Suspect this would work, however, the more committers the less the >>> quality >>> of work? >>> >> Is there any evidence to support that argument? Or is it just a fear of >> that? At any point if that happens, then this can be revoked, the >> selection >> can be tighter, things can be adjusted, nothing is written in stone. Also, >> people were mentioning existing commiters to be sloppy and problematic, >> we've months of waiting for PR's to be taken care of, and there are still >> ports accepted that dont work at all - is that this work quality we're so >> troubled for? >> >> B. >> > > That's a fear admittedly, but your solution would take care of that, would > that also mean a bigger portmgr team too? > > At no point I've suggested anything regarding portmgr team, and I am not in position to judge needs of any changes in that place. It seems however, that with the portsmgr-lurker project they're handling their situation in a good way. B. > > -- > > Regards, > Gary J. Hayers > gary@hayers.org > > PGP Signature > http://www.hayers.org/pgp > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >