What is the problem with ports PR reaction delays?

Big Lebowski spankthespam at gmail.com
Sun Jan 26 14:05:07 UTC 2014

On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Gary J. Hayers <gary at hayers.org> wrote:

> On 26/01/2014 13:32, Big Lebowski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Gary J. Hayers <gary at hayers.org> wrote:
>>> Suspect this would work, however, the more committers the less the
>>> quality
>>> of work?
>> Is there any evidence to support that argument? Or is it just a fear of
>> that? At any point if that happens, then this can be revoked, the
>> selection
>> can be tighter, things can be adjusted, nothing is written in stone. Also,
>> people were mentioning existing commiters to be sloppy and problematic,
>> we've months of waiting for PR's to be taken care of, and there are still
>> ports accepted that dont work at all - is that this work quality we're so
>> troubled for?
>> B.
> That's a fear admittedly, but your solution would take care of that, would
> that also mean a bigger portmgr team too?
At no point I've suggested anything regarding portmgr team, and I am not in
position to judge needs of any changes in that place. It seems however,
that with the portsmgr-lurker project they're handling their situation in a
good way.


> --
> Regards,
> Gary J. Hayers
> gary at hayers.org
> PGP Signature
> http://www.hayers.org/pgp
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list