If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm unsubscribing
jadawin at FreeBSD.org
Wed Dec 18 06:40:45 UTC 2013
On mar, 17 déc 2013, John Marino wrote:
> Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
> mail it to ports@, usually without even saying "hello". I've tried to
> discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
> this method of bypassing writing PRs. One user even proudly boasted
> that sending email to ports@ is faster than writing a PR so of course he
> was going to do that instead.
> If this kind of post is acceptable to the rest of the people here, and
> I'm alone in not only finding it very rude, but also making the volume
> of ports@ too high, then please tell me that the problem is with me.
> If nothing is going to change, I am going to unsubscribe from ports@
> list. The gcc developers on gcc at gcc.gnu.org always tell a poster when a
> post in appropriate for that list and as a result and as a result the
> posters usually only make a mistake once. I'd like to see something
> closer to that, but if the list isn't going to be policed then it's too
> noisy for me.
They don't start their mail wihtout saying "hello"... like you. People
are not polite and we won't change it.
I agree with you that users don't have to use ports@ instead of GNATS
but the fact is that we are slow on GNATS: we still have untouched PR
since beginning 2013 (because i closed 2006, 2011 and 2012).
If we want to change that we have to explain how to use PR (or simply remind
it to users) and to be reactive on GNATS. In my opinon; guilty people
are not users but us. Users find a quicker way and they use it.
More information about the freebsd-ports