Ability for maintainers to update own ports

Kris Kennaway kris at obsecurity.org
Tue Nov 11 10:01:43 PST 2003

On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:42:21AM -0300, Fernan Aguero wrote:

> Which gets me back to the origin of this thread: should
> maintainers have commit privileges for their ports?

No offense, but often the answer is "no".  Committers are more than
just a roadblock to committing PRs, they're a sanity filter that is
supposed to correct most of the errors made by maintainers with only a
casual interest in the ports tree.  Even though I pointed out in a
previous message how many errors make it past this sanity filter and
into the ports tree, I know that there are a lot more that are
filtered out between what is submitted in the PR and what is committed
to the tree.

> little risk if the port is not perfect. In my particular
> case I'm thinking in the biology stuff, because that's my
> main interest. I guess that only a minority of the FreeBSD
> user base would ever install one of those ports. And for
> those that do, what is the potential impact of doing a
> less-than-perfect port? Breaking hier(7)? In this case, 
> the consequences of bad porting practices would impact the
> port itself. 

Broken applications degrade the overall quality of the ports
collection; provide a bad model for others; cause more work for others
to fix the breakage; and ultimately cause more pain for the users of
the ports collection.

There are up-sides, to be sure, but the down-sides are significant.

-------------- 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/20031111/87fbee65/attachment.bin

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list