Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:31:09 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> To: pav@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/75551: [PATCH] Correct a 'post-patch' entry in the port's Makefile since a files/patch-* seems to do the same thing. Message-ID: <20041228213109.6ed4e952@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <1104261378.48118.11.camel@hood.oook.cz> References: <200412281659.iBSGxciD076228@freefall.freebsd.org> <20041228211134.056bb9b3@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <1104261378.48118.11.camel@hood.oook.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 20:16:17 +0100 Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > Ion-Mihai Tetcu p=ED=B9e v =FAt 28. 12. 2004 v 21:11 +0200: > > On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 16:59:38 GMT > > Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >=20 > > > Synopsis: [PATCH] Correct a 'post-patch' entry in the port's Makefile= since a files/patch-* seems to do the same thing. > > >=20 > > > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > > > State-Changed-By: pav > > > State-Changed-When: Tue Dec 28 16:59:05 GMT 2004 > > > State-Changed-Why:=20 > > > Maintainer promised to integrate this patch into his next update. > >=20 > > Pav, why is the state "close" more appropriate that analyzed ? > > I mean I could forget about them ;) >=20 > First, I trust you that you will not forget about them. >=20 > Second, I fear that those PRs would be forgotten in analyzed state once > the port is updated and the matter settled. So I rather closed them. I try not to forget to say about the PRs that should be closed when my PRs supersede them. > > > (Bottom line here is that you should approach maintainer directly, > > > without the detour via send-pr) > >=20 > > For two stylistic ones yes, but for the dir permissions (75549) and > > "UntrustedDeliveryAgent" and "QuarantineAgent (75548), I tend to > > believe a pr is OK. >=20 > Always, always, always, when there is an active maintainer around, > direct contact with a maintainer is strongly preferred. >=20 > It's really an ugly habit to send-pr patch and Cc maintainer. Better that send pr and not cc the maintainer, anyway. > First, a lot of maintainers don't know how to act properly on such > emails, they just don't Cc their replies back to GNATS. I think the problem is that the subj, must begin with FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org or else it becomes a 'misfiled' reply. Only cc'ing seems not to be enough. > And in last row, it creates a lot of administrative overhead for us, > committers. True. --=20 IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041228213109.6ed4e952>