Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 20:40:57 +0200 From: Anton Berezin <tobez@FreeBSD.org> To: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/p5-Cache-Memcached Makefile distinfo Message-ID: <20050922184057.GA97327@heechee.tobez.org> In-Reply-To: <20050922164036.GA97847@utopia.leeym.com> References: <200509220748.j8M7mYMT043867@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050922164036.GA97847@utopia.leeym.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 12:40:36AM +0800, Yen-Ming Lee wrote: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 07:48:34AM +0000, Anton Berezin wrote: > > tobez 2005-09-22 07:48:34 UTC > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > Modified files: > > databases/p5-Cache-Memcached Makefile distinfo > > Log: > > Update to 1.15. Require perl from ports. Assign maintainer to perl@. > > > > Revision Changes Path > > 1.7 +7 -11 ports/databases/p5-Cache-Memcached/Makefile > > 1.3 +2 -2 ports/databases/p5-Cache-Memcached/distinfo > > Just curious... > > Is it a policy to assign maintainer to perl@ for the ports@ owned p5-* > ports? Not really, it's a matter of personal preference. I did not feel like having a maintainer lock on some of those ports, but I did not want them to stay unmaintained, either. There is, I think, a better chance that someone (myself included) will take care of such when they belong to perl@ as opposed to ports@. \Anton. -- An undefined problem has an infinite number of solutions. -- Robert A. Humphrey
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050922184057.GA97327>