If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm unsubscribing

[John Marino]

On 12/19/2013 20:07, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> 
> I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept
> their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has
> build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@ shouldn't
> either. It tells everyone that "yes" there is a problem with this port
> and "it's not just me".


What can I say?  I think pasting an error log, and only an error log, is
"quite rude".  But I'm also serious -- if this is the official response
(and seeing that you are a member of portmgr, that makes it pretty close
to official), then I'll follow through and simply unsubscribe from the
list.  If FreeBSD isn't going to enforce their own procedures and use of
infrastructure, I will limit my exposure to the continuing anarchy and
let "customer service" to those that agree that ports@ is a free-for-all.

John