Do we need a few more ports reviewers/committers?

Boris Samorodov bsam at
Fri May 12 15:14:30 UTC 2006

On Fri, 12 May 2006 10:59:11 -0400 Chuck Swiger wrote:
> 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.

Sure. It was just my case.
BTW, the PR is already committed. Thanks, sem!

> 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.

Right you are.

Boris B. Samorodov, Research Engineer
InPharmTech Co,
Telephone & Internet Service Provider

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list