From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Jul 19 21:20:15 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B16A9A56D3 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 033EE15D5 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 020BF9A56D2; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AC49A56CE for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (hades.sorbs.net [67.231.146.201]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB6715D3; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from michelle@sorbs.net) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NRR0032I7JJYA00@hades.sorbs.net>; Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:26:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <55AC148B.2060601@sorbs.net> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 23:20:11 +0200 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 To: Mathieu Arnold Cc: Baptiste Daroussin , ports@freebsd.org, Dimitry Andric Subject: Re: Self committing... allowed or not? References: <55AB91ED.3080908@sorbs.net> <9917125A-6342-4F62-B374-E4F456EDC015@FreeBSD.org> <55ABBFEC.60302@sorbs.net> <20150719154449.GD50618@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <55ABD3EA.8010704@sorbs.net> <20150719165211.GE50618@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <55AC08F5.3030900@sorbs.net> <89AD420213656BC19239E265@atuin.in.mat.cc> In-reply-to: <89AD420213656BC19239E265@atuin.in.mat.cc> X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 21:20:15 -0000 Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +--On 19 juillet 2015 22:30:45 +0200 Michelle Sullivan > wrote: > |> In fact what I am working on is enforcing openssl (or libressl at user > |> choice) from ports directly (which is why I worked on the ports in the > |> first place - after someone complained on IRC that one month after the > |> ticket being created nothing happened). > |> > | > | So you're calling this maintainer timeout? > > No, he's either fixing that was broken, So you're saying anything that is deemed broken can be changed/fixed without the maintainer's comment or approval? > or doing some infrastructure > change, Not the case here (had it been I would not have made comment.) > there's no need for the maintainer to be involved for this, as > https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-maintainer.html > says. > > Blanket approval for most ports applies to these types of fixes: * Most infrastructure changes to a port (that is, modernizing, but not changing the functionality). For example, converting to staging, |USE_GMAKE| to |USES=gmake|, the new |LIB_DEPENDS| format... * Trivial and /tested/ build and runtime fixes. Note the 'tested' (I didn't italic it) ... the fix was tested for the PR (we have the committers word on that, no evidence of that though - which is a requirement for the plebs like me.) The testing I am sure didn't check a dependency was not broken, only the target port was now 'fixed'. The port explicitly set OpenSSL from ports - this was probably a bad thing, the change removed that, not a bad thing, but also not a trivial change (as it changes the default build behavior) and testing of other things that depended on this port was not done as far as anyone can tell, which means it could have broken something and doesn't follow the 'tested' requirement. Look, I am trying to point out here, there are rules and procedures, I believe they were not followed, and I believe they should have been. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/