perl 5.8.3 in ports

Michael Nottebrock michaelnottebrock at
Wed Mar 24 14:24:58 PST 2004

On Wednesday 24 March 2004 23:04, Vivek Khera wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2004, at 4:54 PM, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
> >> Personally, I prefer not to be poked at my direct email since I
> >> monitor
> >> this list, but I suppose I could email tobez directly, too.
> >
> > That's a pretty strange notion - port maintainers need to supply a
> > valid mail
> > address for the MAINTAINER field for a reason.
> Until you have a very popular port, at which time about 30 seconds
> after the author releases an update you start getting pounded with
> repeated questions of when will it be updated.

Very true :-). However, if that's _really_ a problem for a maintainer (for 
example because of job-induced periods of ENOTIMEFORFREEBSD), MAINTAINER 
should be (re)set to ports at - it doesn't stop anybody from caring 
about a port and regularly submitting updates, but it will stop the "New 
version iz out, can u update plz, thx!!!111!!" spam.

   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi at
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     |
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: signature
Url :

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list