Fast releases demand binary updates..

[Ceri Davies]

I don't want to get embroiled in this conversation, but I am  
concerned about the use of GNATS illustrated here.

On 12 Jan 2006, at 07:34, Jo Rhett wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 07, 2006 at 01:05:13PM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote:
>
>>
>> ports/76013 - patch committed after four months
>> ports/76019 - superceded after a month
>
> One was committed, the other superceded.  The first change only  
> works if
> the latter is commited.  Thus, the port remains broken and we keep  
> using
> localized patches to fix it.

Where does it say that in the PR?

> The 'superceding port' is a different apache module that has different
> limitations.  There is no reason not to commit the latter and fix this
> particular port, but I can't convince anyone to do that.

I don't know that you tried.  Why didn't you followup to the PR and  
ask for it to be reopened, or point out that there was a problem?

>> ports/76724 - patch committed after a week
>> docs/87445 - immediately adopted by a committer, being worked on
>
> I received no e-mail notification of either.  My posts about said  
> bugs to
> the appropriate mailing lists garnered no responses other than "put  
> in GNATS"

We don't have mail logs back that far, so I can't see where that went  
wrong, but GNATS always send the submitter mail on a state change.   
You could always have looked at the PR.

>> Oh, how we have wronged you!  Please let us know how we may correct
>> this grievous injustice!
>
> Nice sarcasm.  Doesn't change that these were ignored,

Except that we have shown that they were not, of course.

Ceri

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20060112/9b92082b/PGP.bin