cvs commit: ports/archivers/gzip Makefile ports/archivers/ucl
Makefile ports/archivers/lzop Makefile ports/archivers/cabext
michaelnottebrock at gmx.net
Mon Apr 11 17:53:03 PDT 2005
On Tuesday, 12. April 2005 02:16, Doug Barton wrote:
> Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> > On Monday, 11. April 2005 21:20, Doug Barton wrote:
> >>Adam Weinberger wrote:
> >>>I believe emphatically that the sanity tests should be non-optional.
> >>And I believe emphatically the opposite. And your comment about the
> >>procmail filter is totally unsuitable for those who pay for their
> >> bandwidth by the byte. The more burdens you add to ports maintainers the
> >> fewer of them we will be able to attract.
> > Note that the automatic mails people are discussing here would be sent to
> > the *committer*, not the maintainer - and as a ports-committer, you
> > pretty much have opted in to receive (and read, too!) all sorts of mails
> > regarding your work when you accepted the commit bit. It's a punishment
> > after all.
> Thank you for clarifying this. You've now given me yet another reason to
> not ever pick up and commit a PR for a new port.
Ah, don't mention it. And don't forget to turn in your ports commit bit when
you get a spare minute.
,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi at freebsd.org
(/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org
\u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-ports/attachments/20050412/60626da6/attachment.bin
More information about the cvs-ports