Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2020 16:57:00 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: "@lbutlr" <kremels@kreme.com> Cc: FreeBSD <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Portmaster failing Message-ID: <69EC35FF-8952-44D9-960E-5BC764B37D6B@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <C53B7AD2-3188-482F-9356-8AFC651C7135@kreme.com> References: <C53B7AD2-3188-482F-9356-8AFC651C7135@kreme.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Jan 1, 2020, at 15:49, @lbutlr <kremels@kreme.com> wrote: >=20 >>>> You are right that there wasn't a warning, and that was a major >>>> mistake that should not have happened. security/openssl and >>>> security/openssl111 should have contained messages about this switch. >>>=20 >>> Since openssl updated about a week ago, this oversight falls into the cl= ass that I would call ???inexcusable???. If I did this on a job I would (rig= htly) be immediately fired. >>>=20 >>> I would fire me if I did something like this. >=20 >> If we fired every volunteer when some mishap has happened, we >> would run of of volunteers very fast. >=20 > This was the responsibility of a single volunteer? Removing openssl withou= t warning wasn=E2=80=99t something that was discussed over the last six mont= hs? Ok, let=E2=80=99s stop there. Nobody is going to get fired, and insulting ou= r team of volunteers who worked incredibly hard to bring the openssl switch t= o fruition is unproductive and uncalled-for. I already acknowledged that we n= eed to do it better next time, so let=E2=80=99s focus instead on solving pro= blems rather than lashing out to people who are here simply to help. # Adam =E2=80=94 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?69EC35FF-8952-44D9-960E-5BC764B37D6B>