Ability for maintainers to update own ports

[Kris Kennaway]

On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 07:16:53PM -0800, Allan Bowhill wrote:
> >> The first can be satisfied with something like pkgsrc-wip, and I always
> >> wondered why we don't have a ports-FRESH and ports-TESTED, like we have
> >> -CURRENT and -STABLE.
> 
> >Because even with a single, unbranched ports collection, committers
> >can't keep it in working order without significant ongoing effort.  On
> >average, several ports become broken on one of the supported
> >architectures and versions, *each day*.  That's not counting the
> >periodic "cataclysmic events" where hundreds of ports become broken
> >due to e.g. a change in -current, and not counting errors introduced
> >in the course of development work on the ports collection
> >architecture.
> 
> All the more reason to allow commit access to maintainers of leaf-node
> ports (ports that do not serve as dependencies to others, particularly
> multiple ports).
> How many of these packages are there - about 8000 to 9000? Wouldn't that
> take a load off committers?

I doubt it, because then we'd also have to clean up all the mistakes
made by novice porters.  A lot of submitted PRs contain mistakes that
need to be corrected.  Most of them are caught by the committer review
process.  If the maintainer just committed their broken changes
directly, then everyone suffers from it.

> Maybe a FreeBSD 3rd party developers portal could be created, like
> "PortsForge"  where maintainers and contributor wannabes could polish-up
> their work and commit it without burdening Gnats.

Perhaps..feel free!

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20031112/bea942cc/attachment.bin