https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=266532

--- Comment #18 from Guido Falsi <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Ivan Rozhuk from comment #17)

> Is POLA include bugs? )

Well actually it could, but that's not the point here.

There is no bug. It looks to me you have a very personal definition of bug and
of how to "solve" them.

> Or these 2 scripts may be distributed separately and sample config may use it 
> by default.

Great idea, why don't you file a bug report for  anew port which includes these
two scripts and all the glue needed to install them? Maybe someone would pick
it up (not me, obviously)

> sw cursor + heavy load like llvm/chromium compilation.
> This is very simple change to improve user experience without any risk of 
> side effects.

The point is that changing Xorg priority is not a bugfix, but a local
workaround that each user can choose to apply locally, and is not something
that we should impose from the official ports.

Personally I don't consider what you describe as a bug or even an annoyance.
But that's me.


> This is very simple change to improve user experience without any risk of 
> side effects.

This is your opinion, but is against port rules. Any patch included in the
ports tree should also be sent upstream [1] so your proposal of including a
patch that is not good enough to be upstreamed is not acceptable by the ports
rules.

Also not upstreaming patches is a big problem with the ports tree. Differences
with upstream accumulate and we are handling ports here, not forks.

So yes, if upstreeam has a bug, the bug is expected to also exist in the port.
It can be fixed in the port before the upstream but in such a way to be
upstreamed.

Anyway I'm not considering these scripts for inclusion. I would not feel
comfortable committing them. But this will not stop you from writing to the
mailing lists or seeking other committer's interest in them.


[1]
https://docs.freebsd.org/en/articles/contributing/#_maintainer_responsibilities

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to