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

Kirill Ponomarew krion at
Fri Jun 15 19:23:02 UTC 2007

On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 04:19:31PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> Andrew is being perhaps overly pedantic here, but he's right in
> principal.  Consistency and standard conformance even in format of
> "Foobared by:" entries doesn't lower quality of our ports, does it?

Standardizing "Foobared by:" entries would improve the quality of
our ports ?  I don't want to comment it, because it's already
getting into bikeshed.

> > >  As for the mailing-list, I think ports-committers is
> > >  the most appropriate one because this is primarily an
> > >  inter-committer process. 
> > 
> > You can't even really imagine how many users read ports-committers
> > list just to know the changes in the ports tree.  They're not
> > interested in the above notes.  So, please respect our users as well
> > and don't think only about committers guys.
> Kirill, those non-committers who read ports-committers@ are very likely
> to consider being a submitter (or even committer!) in the future.

? I know a lot of people who just want to track down ports changes
in cvs-ports@, they don't want to contribute and they don't want to
get committers hats.

> In this case I find it useful if they learn most common mistakes
> *before* they start making them themselves.

> This is one of rare cases when one can learn on others' mistakes
> as well (i.e., good) as on their own.

I didn't tell it's a bad idea to send your comments, everybody's
welcome to do it.  But this kind of comments, like in this thread are

If Andrew doesn't have a *feeling* what comments are needed and why
they're needed, he should go on with reviews privately together with


More information about the cvs-ports mailing list