Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 23:09:29 +0200 From: Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Self committing... allowed or not? Message-ID: <55AC1209.2090809@sorbs.net> In-Reply-To: <AC2CF216A0D760A2B58537DF@atuin.in.mat.cc> References: <55AB91ED.3080908@sorbs.net> <AC2CF216A0D760A2B58537DF@atuin.in.mat.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +--On 19 juillet 2015 14:02:53 +0200 Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> > wrote: > | please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't self committing (those with the > | commit bit committing their own patches without QA/review/adding > | patchfiles to the PR) against the rules?... or is it just a free-for-all > | now? > > It is not. > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-maintainer.html > > That would seem at first read that the changes were not within the normal 'rules' (which was my thought and my reason for the email.) The patches should have been sent to the maintainer for review before invoking the timeout (as has happened to me in the past - patches were sent I was on holiday in the Seychelles when I got back I had to catch up with work in the mean time (at the beginning of my holiday) a patch was submitted to fix the testing phase of one of my ports and they timed it out on me with a rather sarcastic comment IIRC... they were right to time it out, and had they waited for me to review and comment it would have been over a month before I had gotten to it in the end, but a patch was created by someone, submitted for review and after 14 days the patch was committed as 'timed out'.) -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55AC1209.2090809>