New mailing list: freebsd-python
Joe Marcus Clarke
marcus at marcuscom.com
Thu Jan 8 17:45:08 PST 2004
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 20:39, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > What? PRs assigned to gnome tend to rot? You may want to have a look
> > at your stats before saying something like that.
> I have checked, and you are completely correct and I am completely wrong.
> I apologize.
Not a problem. gnome@ likes to keep as neat of a house as possible.
Some PRs may languish for a while, but anything serious we try to get on
> In fact (including the phoenix ones), there are exactly four, one
> of which I'm attempting to work on with the submitter.
I think you still have a bug in your reporting tool. I see three
(including the two phoenix bugs). The foomatic thing (58460) is not
part of GNOME, and we don't maintain any of the foomatic ports (somehow
you have that linked to libxml2).
> All I can say is that I must be confusing the build error reports
> with the PR reports, or am still not over my sinus infection, or ...
> (There _are_ more than 4 build errors :-) , some of which look
> like they were from a bad run on ia64-5-full.)
Yeah, I saw that. After the latest 5.2-RELEASE build, the GNOME errors
we fairly low. We still need to work out some porting problems on
amd64, but after that, we should be in good shape.
> > As for PRs assigned to phoenix@, those should be moved over to gnome at .
> I will do this.
> Again, sorry about shooting from the hip. IMHO we all have
> the same goals here: make the ports collection as useful as
PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20040108/b82a390b/attachment.bin
More information about the freebsd-ports