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

John Marino freebsd.contact at marino.st
Thu Dec 19 19:35:40 UTC 2013

On 12/19/2013 20:28, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> I didn't say I spoke for portmgr. I just don't see the big deal and it's
> odd that it's OK on 1 list but not another. It's anti-user to get mad at
> them for trying to get help or report it for others. Of course we prefer
> they use GNATS, but go look in there and you'll see it grows every day
> upward. ports@ is a community that more people read than
> freebsd-ports-bugs and are more likely to get help and discuss how they
> fixed the issue. We are a mailing-list driven organization after all.
> IMHO threatening to unsubscribe for users trying to get help is not
> appropriate.

This is not what is going on.
Writing a PR is more work than sending an email.
Many of these people using ports@ as an alternate for GNATS are very
well aware of GNATS, and they are simply bypassing it.  In other words,
they are happy to cause more work to the FreeBSD ports committers if it
saves them 3 minutes.  They aren't "users trying to get help", they are
"users gaming the system".

I don't find the status quo personally acceptable, but I only have
control of my actions, therefore "my threats" are the only recourse I
have and thus they are appropriate.


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list