From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Nov 15 16:38:47 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D96A846; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:38:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206c::16:87]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB8518FC12; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:38:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qAFGckVW010215; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:38:46 GMT (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from bapt@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id qAFGckGH010214; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:38:46 GMT (envelope-from bapt@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: bapt set sender to bapt@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 17:38:44 +0100 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: Eitan Adler Subject: Re: svn commit: r307457 - head/Mk Message-ID: <20121115163843.GH75103@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <201211151436.qAFEahgO099183@svn.freebsd.org> <20121115161242.GA88933@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0XhtP95kHFp3KGBe" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.org, Alexey Dokuchaev , ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-ports-all@FreeBSD.org, Ports Management Team X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:38:47 -0000 --0XhtP95kHFp3KGBe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:22:47AM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > On 15 November 2012 11:12, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:08:06AM -0500, Eitan Adler wrote: > >> On 15 November 2012 09:36, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > >> > New Revision: 307457 > >> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/307457 > >> > > >> > Log: > >> > Add SOCKS and STROKE options standard descriptions. > >> > >> Can portmgr please make it more clear what is and isn't permitted > >> during a feature freeze? > >> http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/implementation.html would seem to say > >> that this commit is not allowed (any commit to bsd.*.mk) but I've seen > >> already a few commits to this file. > > > > Oops, technically you're right, sorry, didn't catch that *any* part. On > > the other hand, I do not think this particular commit can break anythin= g, > > plus we already had branched. I can grep -R just to make sure. >=20 > To be clear: >=20 > I want portmgr to clarify this. I *don't* want this to be disallowed. >=20 > The problem is that there isn't any document that is actually being follo= wed > that says "this is okay, but that isn't". >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Eitan Adler > Source, Ports, Doc committer > Bugmeister, Ports Security teams Everything can't be written in a policy, or that would be so long that noone will actually read it. We expect people to have some common sense. The main reason for this freeze= is to be able to have clean packages for the release and we don't want any com= mit to break the tree so that we are sure to have the cleanest packages tree po= ssible. So before committing ask yourself "does it ever has a chance to be able to = break things?" Modifying something that can potentially have an inpact on the ports buildi= ng process is definitly prohibited, doing a sweep commit is prohibited, modifying the license framework is prohibited in the sense that it can act = on restricted informations and thus inpact lots of ports etc, we can't list al= l. But modifying options descriptions or adding some new can't have any inpact= so obviously it is feature safe. Sure we need some policy, but please, can we avoid too much bureaucracy and= trust the common sense? I think in that parcitular case of ports freeze the rules= are quite clear, and if you have a single doubt just send a mail requesting for= a portmgr approval. regards, bapt --0XhtP95kHFp3KGBe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlClGpMACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ex6tQCgk9/3KXthFuRCpFSuugNAAnxn OfEAn19sxxu40ZxoQo36axO09tO/tNkk =dV+p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0XhtP95kHFp3KGBe--