PR's not being picked up (Was Re: becoming a port committor)

[Jason Helfman]

Here is a patch to take care of removing of "updating".

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 02:08:02PM -0800, Charlie Kester thus spake:
>On Mon 22 Nov 2010 at 11:28:36 PST Greg Byshenk wrote:
>>
>>I'm not a porter, but how about the below...?
>>HTH
>>-greg
>>
>>--- begin diff ---
>>
>>--- porting-submitting.html	2007-09-11 01:11:07.000000000 +0200
>>+++ porting-submitting.html	2010-11-22 20:14:54.000000000 +0100
>>@@ -69,6 +69,14 @@
>> </blockquote>
>> </div>
>>
>>+<div class="NOTE">
>>+<blockquote class="NOTE">
>>+<p><b>Note2:</b> The instructions above are for creating a <i class="EMPHASIS">new</i>
>>+port. Port <i class="EMPHASIS">updates</i> should be diff files instead of shar files,
>>+as described in <a href="port-upgrading.html">Upgrading</a>.</p>
>>+</blockquote>
>>+</div>
>>+
>> <p>One more time, <span class="emphasis"><i class="EMPHASIS">do not include the original
>> source distfile, the <tt class="FILENAME">work</tt> directory, or the package you built
>> with <tt class="COMMAND">make package</tt></i></span>.</p>
>>
>>
>>--- end diff ---
>
>While we're at it, remove any mention of port updates from the existing
>note:
>
>--- begin diff ---
>--- porting-submitting.html.orig        2010-11-22 14:01:35.000000000 -0800
>+++ porting-submitting.html     2010-11-22 14:02:09.000000000 -0800
>@@ -66,9 +66,8 @@
>  <blockquote class="NOTE">
>  <p><b>Note:</b> You can make our work a lot easier, if you use a good description in the
>  synopsis of the problem report. We prefer something like ``New port:
>-<category>/<portname> <short description of the port>'' for new ports
>-and ``Update port: <category>/<portname> <short description of the
>-update>'' for port updates. If you stick to this scheme, the chance that someone will
>+<category>/<portname> <short description of the port>'' for new ports.
>+If you stick to this scheme, the chance that someone will
>  take a look at your PR soon is much better.</p>
>  </blockquote>
>  </div>
>--- end diff ---
>
>I'm not sure, but I suspect that this note has been the source of the confusion.
>_______________________________________________
>freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>

-- 
-jgh
-------------- next part --------------
--- porters-handbook/book.sgml	2010-11-23 11:49:21.000000000 -0800
+++ porters-handbook/book.sgml	2010-11-23 11:50:28.000000000 -0800
@@ -394,9 +394,7 @@
 	    description in the synopsis of the problem report.
 	    We prefer something like
 	    <quote>New port: <category>/<portname>
-	    <short description of the port></quote> for new ports and
-	    <quote>Update port: <category>/<portname>
-	    <short description of the update></quote> for port updates.
+	    <short description of the port></quote>.
 	    If you stick to this scheme, the chance that someone will take a
 	    look at your PR soon is much better.</para>
 	</note>