cvs commit: ports/net/rdesktop pkg-plist

Kirill Ponomarew krion at
Thu Mar 10 23:25:22 PST 2005

On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 03:57:55PM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> Yes, the patch was a mess, I read what I could from it and updated the
> port.  The maintainer is not a committer and I did not know the patch
> submitted wasn't the maintainer when I read it.  The maintainer is not a
> committer and thus cannot update this port himself.  I have seen no
> objections from him.

I don't object if you fix ports builds, but doing ports updates
without maintainer's approval right and left is not acceptable, read
Porters Handbook how it should be handled, thanks.

> Have we become so process oriented that we've become paralyzed??
> Actually, yes we have.  It boggles my mind where being a Ports Committer
> in 1995 under Satoshi has turned into.  It boggles my mind that a comment
> fix to has to be run thru an experimental build.  

You don't need to boogle your mind, you just need to submit the PR,
assign it to portmgr and they decide what to do with it.

> Yet portmgr can't address issues of port stealing?  No portmgr
> replied to the thread when elk hijacked the 'bash' port from me.

Sure ?  IIRC you didn't answer his mails *at all*.  But after
repocopy I suddenly heard complains from you side.

You were asked 3(!) times if it was approved or not by maintainer,
since you updated the port, but you didn't care and want to complain
now ?


More information about the cvs-ports mailing list