Approving a patch

Kubilay Kocak koobs at
Wed Mar 4 10:23:34 UTC 2015

On 4/03/2015 9:05 PM, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
> On 4/03/2015 9:00 PM, Doug Hardie wrote:
>>> On 3 March 2015, at 22:45, Kubilay Kocak <koobs at> wrote:
>>> Canonically and preferred:
>>> Set maintainer-approval flag to + *on the attachment/patch*.
>>> The maintainer-feedback flag is at the issue/bug scope, not the
>>> attachment/patch scope.
>>> This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with
>>> your email as the value first.
>>> Currently this is not automatic, but *should be* if there is an
>>> attachment of type: patch in the issue. I'll create an issue for that
>>> now for bugmeister@ to look into addressing.
>>> Only in cases where maintainer-approval is *not* already set to"?", is
>>> using the maintainer-feedback flag + comment flow OK.
>>> Setting maintainer-feedback is ambiguous, and is used to prove
>>> 'acknowledgement' of an issue or question.
>>> This is especially the case when there are multiple version of patches,
>>> or patches from multiple contributors. In future it will be used to
>>> derive "maintainer timeouts" to kick issues along, and open them up for
>>> someone else to make a decision on.
>>> tldr; Set the maintainer-approval flag to +
>> Thanks to all who replied.  I found and set the maintainer-feedback flag at the issue/bug scope.  I couldn’t find any similar flag at the attachment/patch scope.  Nothing there was really applicable.
> Which issue?


Ignore that, I found it:

I've set the maintainer-approval flag to "+" for you.

Note: this is what I meant in my on-list reply by:

"This of course requires the maintainer-approval flag was set to ? with
your email as the value first."

In your issues case, the flag hadn't been set yet.

I've created a new issue on this exact point, so as to make setting the
maintainer-approval flag automatic. You can follow it here:


Kubilay Kocak

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list