Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 15:59:15 +0100 From: Rodrigo Osorio <rodrigo@bebik.net> To: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> Cc: David Demelier <demelier.david@gmail.com>, "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org>, marino@freebsd.org, freebsd.contact@marino.st Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm unsubscribing Message-ID: <20131219145915.GB5264@oldfaithful.bebik.local> In-Reply-To: <20131219220916.0b5fbde5@X220.alogt.com> References: <52B0D149.5020308@marino.st> <CAO%2BPfDfV6qdnNMgfrMDj=QumP4yc%2BRWUop_iNybTomObVwaAnA@mail.gmail.com> <20131219135421.63d7cd20@X220.alogt.com> <52B2EECA.10908@marino.st> <20131219214150.4dd55b09@X220.alogt.com> <20131219134641.GA5264@oldfaithful.bebik.local> <20131219220916.0b5fbde5@X220.alogt.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 19/12/13 22:09 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:46:41 +0100 > Rodrigo Osorio <rodrigo@bebik.net> wrote: > > > On 19/12/13 21:41 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100 > > > John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> wrote: > > > > > > > On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > > you got the point. We have to assume that a port which is not > > > > > marked broken has to work. > > > > > > > > I build the entire port tree several times a month. I can tell > > > > you from experience that this assumption is not valid. > > > > > > so, you want to say, that all the little problems which are solved > > > mainly by people who are not the maintainer should become PRs? > > > > IMHO, it's the only way to reach quality in the port tree with a very > > accurate traceability. > > you want to say i.e. all the e-mails regarding the switch to KMS > supported X should be PRs just because the writer did not read UPDATING > and the other sources? I think that this can easily handled here > without any PR. > > Erich I don't think ocular problems are in my skills....but... why not, specially if they think there is a real problem with a port. I'm not saying PR is the only, mandatory, way to solve problems. You can talk about a problem in forums,ml, wathever, but if a fix is required it's better to report it as a PR. PR are bette in many ways, with a PR, a problem is - most of the time - assigned to someone so you can complain if nothing is done, in a ML, if nobody cares, there is no problem. obviously, sumarize a problem takes or found a solution takes more time than shoot a "this port doesn't work" email. - rodrigo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20131219145915.GB5264>