cvs commit: ports/games/ppracer Makefile pkg-descr

[Szilveszter Adam]

[Not to comment on the substance, just one nit]

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 06:34:29PM +0200, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
> There are no non-committers reading ports-committers. The 
> ports-committers list is a private list for those ones, who are in 
> CVSROOT/access for the ports repo. Similarly doc-committers and 
> src-committers serve in the same way but for the doc and src repos.

Gabor, maybe you haven't noticed but these messages also go to (for
example) the cvs-all@ list, which *is* a public list and read by
non-committers as well. For example, if you run -CURRENT (as I do) you
are even *expected* (and rightly so) to read the cvs-* lists to know
what is coming your way, because it is not possible to calculate all
risks of a particular commit beforehand, so it cannot be expected that
UPDATING will tell you everything you need to know. Likewise, for ports,
it is a good idea to actually follow the ports commits (even on -STABLE)
so that you see which ports actually changed (and which merely had their
portrevision bumped for other reasons) and what dependencies you should
consider when upgrading a port even if their portrevision was *not*
bumped so automatic tools do not notice them. Both situations occur with
some likelihood and reading the ports commit logs helps in both cases.

Oh, and one more thing: reading the cvs-* lists is also good for
deciding *when* to update your sources/ports, because that way you can
see when a larger set of commits has been finished or simply, when the
rate of commits has decreased sufficiently for a while (eg during the
nighttime in the US) to not miss anything significant while doing the
update.

So, if the reviews only happened on the respective *-committers lists, I
think no non-committers would complain.

-- 
Regards:

Szilveszter ADAM
Budapest
Hungary