[Bug 269810] ports-mgmt/pkg: how to restore pkg database

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=269810

--- Comment #8 from Graham Perrin <grahamperrin@freebsd.org> ---
Back closer to topic, in an effort to avoid confusion: removal of
<https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc/pull/117> from the See Also field of
this bug report was not specific to this report. This one removal was,
naturally, consequent to a broader request for (indiscriminate) closure of all
my PRs in that area. 

----

Back on topic, for readers who may be unfamiliar with features of GitHub: 

    .diff and .patch files do remain available, as shown below (their 
                     URLs are disallowed for See Also purposes).

<https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc/pull/117.diff>

<https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc/pull/117.patch>     

----

Looking ahead, more generally: Bugmeister might like to advise whether it's
appropriate to have the 'needs-patch' keyword in situations such as this, where
a patch file is available but not directly attached. Reports with no
non-obsolete patch attached can _not_ be found by queries such as this: 

<https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?cmdtype=runnamed&namedcmd=all%20open%20reports%20with%20a%20non-obsolete%20patch%2C%20by%20assignee>

> all open reports with a non-obsolete patch, by assignee

For readers to _not_ misconstrue needs-patch as no-patch, my instinct is to
misuse the deprecated 'patch' keyword ;-)

Yep, the one that I long ago batch-applied before the deprecated keyword was
marked as such. Oops.

Of course, I'll not apply it :-)

This discussion can continue in private. No rush. Thanks.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.