Do we need a few more ports reviewers/committers?

Chuck Swiger cswiger at
Fri May 12 14:59:16 UTC 2006

Boris Samorodov wrote:
> On Fri, 12 May 2006 12:53:50 +0200 Frank Steinborn wrote:
>> If you *are* the maintainer of the port use [maintainer update],
>> otherwise you should consider sending your patch to the maintainer
>> directly or use at least [change-request].
> The phrase "If you are volunteering to maintain the port, be sure to
> put [maintainer update] at the beginning of your synopsis line and set
> the ``Class'' of your PR to maintainer-update." seems to tell quite
> the opposite.

Note that this is following the context set in the previous paragraph, 
which was:  "If the port is unmaintained, and you are actively using it 
yourself, please consider volunteering to become its maintainer."  If 
you wish to become the maintainer of a port that is being maintained by 
nobody, aka ports at, using maintainer-update makes sense.

If the port already has a maintainer, and you're not that person, using 
update or change-request seems more appropriate, unless you have 
coordinated the hand-off of maintainership already with the former 
maintainer and/or portmgr at .  Other people feel that you should not set 
the Class to maintainer-update until after the PR which assigns the 
maintainership to you has been committed.


PS: For example, see

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list