Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:57:53 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Michael Scheidell <scheidell@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: helping out INDEX builds. best practices? Message-ID: <4F31D6A1.5070501@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4F31D573.7040708@FreeBSD.org> References: <4F31D347.9060509@FreeBSD.org> <4F31D475.3030307@FreeBSD.org> <4F31D573.7040708@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/07/2012 17:52, Michael Scheidell wrote: > > > On 2/7/12 8:48 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 02/07/2012 17:43, Michael Scheidell wrote: >>> if a certain port needs to be kept in sync with another portversion, >>> other than putting a comment in the main port "# must bump portversion >>> in port..." where you have two maintainers, is there a better way to do >>> this? >> Take a look at editors/xxe and editors/xml2rfc-xx > > ok, but I said these are two maintainers, Before I maintained either they were both maintained by 2 different people. :) > and I would need to get them > both to use an include file on another person's port. Well yeah, but so what? Most people who maintain ports are cooperative/friendly and are willing to listen to reasoned arguments about solid technical changes. And for the rest we'll apply the LART. > I did say without needing to do an include from another persons' port. Yes, but given that doing it this way is the right answer I ignored you. :) Doug -- It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short. Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F31D6A1.5070501>