At the beginning of the thread, I used the gcc developer list as an
actual example. If anyone posst an inappropriate topic to the list, it
may get answered, but it will always get a this is not appropriate for
this list, please don't do it again, use the list for this next
time. I can
John Marino wrote:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One user even proudly
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 11:13:43 -0700
From: Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm
unsubscribing
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 01:44:57AM -0800, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
From: Thomas Mueller
There
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 12:45 -0500, Eitan Adler wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Lars Engels lars.eng...@0x20.net wrote:
Am 2013-12-17 23:33, schrieb John Marino:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 01:44:57AM -0800, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
From: Thomas Mueller
There are many messages on this thread, and I don't know which or
what to quote, but I agree on send-pr being user-unfriendly.
I disagree.
I use only send-pr to send PRs.
I use sendmail.
I
On Thu, 2013-12-19 at 11:13 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 01:44:57AM -0800, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
From: Thomas Mueller
There are many messages on this thread, and I don't know which or
what to quote, but I agree on send-pr being user-unfriendly.
I
Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm
unsubscribing
From: clutton clut...@zoho.com
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 01:44:57AM -0800, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
From: Thomas Mueller
There are many messages on this thread, and
On 20/12/2013 10:32 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
In other words, as a new user
I thought of sending a PR as
a last resort, because I doubted
myself a lot more than the
stability of FreeBSD and the
expertise of the team.
The actual tools to submit a PR
were never an obstacle.
This.
If
On 12/20/2013 14:17, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am that user too. A
@FreeBSD.org email, commit bit and still a new user that doubts myself
sometimes and looks to the team for the right thing to do.
If not for the encouragement of those in the project who
On 21/12/2013 12:41 AM, John Marino wrote:
On 12/20/2013 14:17, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am that user too. A
@FreeBSD.org email, commit bit and still a new user that doubts myself
sometimes and looks to the team for the right thing to do.
If not for the
On 12/20/2013 15:09, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
I appreciate the distinction, and I agree with your premises. Setting a
high standard is not in question.
Thanks.
If your aim however, is to change or influence others, and you'll grant
that not everyone can know all there is to know about the values
On 21/12/2013 1:24 AM, John Marino wrote:
On 12/20/2013 15:09, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
I appreciate the distinction, and I agree with your premises. Setting a
high standard is not in question.
Thanks.
If your aim however, is to change or influence others, and you'll grant
that not everyone
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 12:17:21AM +1100, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
On 20/12/2013 10:32 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
In other words, as a new user
I thought of sending a PR as
a last resort, because I doubted
myself a lot more than the
stability of FreeBSD and the
expertise of the team.
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:30:09PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
I think train wreck applies more to sendmail than send-pr. Sendmail
dates back to long-ago pre-Internet days where computer users didn't
send email to other computer users. Now a computer user needs to be
able to send through
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Chad Perrin c...@apotheon.net wrote:
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 12:30:09PM +, Thomas Mueller wrote:
I think train wreck applies more to sendmail than send-pr. Sendmail
dates back to long-ago pre-Internet days where computer users didn't
send email to other
From: Thomas Mueller mueller6...@bellsouth.net
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: If ports@ list continues to be used as substitute for GNATS, I'm
unsubscribing
There are many messages on this thread, and I don't know which or what to
quote, but I agree on send-pr being user-unfriendly.
On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
you got the point. We have to assume that a port which is not marked
broken has to work.
I build the entire port tree several times a month. I can tell you from
experience that this assumption is not valid.
So, the fault is on our side. Why should
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st wrote:
On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
you got the point. We have to assume that a port which is not marked
broken has to work.
I build the entire port tree several times a month. I can tell you
On 12/19/2013 14:41, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st wrote:
On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
you got the point. We have to assume that a port which is not marked
broken has to work.
I build the entire port
On 19/12/13 21:41 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st wrote:
On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
you got the point. We have to assume that a port which is not marked
broken has to work.
I build the
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:46:41 +0100
Rodrigo Osorio rodr...@bebik.net wrote:
On 19/12/13 21:41 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st wrote:
On 12/19/2013 06:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
you got the point. We
On 19/12/13 22:09 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:46:41 +0100
Rodrigo Osorio rodr...@bebik.net wrote:
On 19/12/13 21:41 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 14:04:10 +0100
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st wrote:
On
On 12/17/2013 4:33 PM, John Marino wrote:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Bryan Drewery bdrew...@freebsd.org wrote:
I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept
their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has
build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@ shouldn't
either.
On 12/19/2013 20:07, Bryan Drewery wrote:
I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept
their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has
build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@ shouldn't
either. It tells everyone that yes
On 12/19/2013 1:21 PM, John Marino wrote:
On 12/19/2013 20:07, Bryan Drewery wrote:
I sincerely disagree and think it's quite rude to users to not accept
their reports however they send them to us. current@ constantly has
build failures on it, even automated. There's no reason ports@
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
19.12.2013 23:35, John Marino пишет:
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.
May be you just ignore those emails? I don't think that there are
plenty of them.
--
Bryan Drewery wrote:
If FreeBSD isn't going to enforce their own procedures and use of
infrastructure, I will limit my exposure to the continuing anarchy and
let customer service to those that agree that ports@ is a
free-for-all.
[snip]
ports@ is a community that more people read than
I wrote:
In short: if the way this list is being used (at least by some,
vis-a-vis the dump an error log without as much as a hello)
Was supposed to be followed by
bothers certain people here
I wouldn't mind if people were more encouraged to try the forums,
[snip]
Sorry for the omission,
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 01:44:57AM -0800, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
From: Thomas Mueller
There are many messages on this thread, and I don't know which or
what to quote, but I agree on send-pr being user-unfriendly.
I disagree.
I use only send-pr to send PRs.
I use sendmail.
I
It sounds like a need for a more grained structure of the
ports-related communication, just because the community is growing.
Very often there is a need to discuss one's issue in a list prior to
filing a PR. And yes, *discuss*, I agree with John, people should show
they want to discuss their
2013/12/17 John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing
On mar, 17 dE9c 2013, John Marino wrote:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One
Markiyan Kushnir markiyan.kush...@gmail.com:
It sounds like a need for a more grained structure of the
ports-related communication, just because the community is growing.
Very often there is a need to discuss one's issue in a list prior to
filing a PR. And yes, *discuss*, I agree with John,
Markiyan Kushnir markiyan.kush...@gmail.com:
There's already ports-bugs@ for issues with ports (see the info on
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports-bugs).
And this also would be the correct address for QAT reports, which
are actually spamming the ports@ list (also imho).
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
Do the QAT reports bug you on this list? If they do not, why is that so?
I did not see you complain about those.
On 12/18/2013 13:12, Marcus von Appen wrote:
John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
First I want to address hello. People have been interpreting this
Am 2013-12-17 23:33, schrieb John Marino:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Lars Engels lars.eng...@0x20.net wrote:
Am 2013-12-17 23:33, schrieb John Marino:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Eitan Adler li...@eitanadler.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Lars Engels lars.eng...@0x20.net
wrote:
Am 2013-12-17 23:33, schrieb John Marino:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 12:59 PM, William Grzybowski
willia...@gmail.com wrote:
Who will be taking the lead of this change so we
can refer to?
bugmeister@ is always the contact address to use.
gonzo has been doing most of the technical work
I've been doing a lot of the workflow /
There are many messages on this thread, and I don't know which or what to
quote, but I agree on send-pr being user-unfriendly.
One problem is setting up mail with outbound SMTP server: sendmail is too
mysterious/mystic to be useful.
I think most email clients set up to use POP3 and SMTP server
Hi,
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 11:46:58 +0100
David Demelier demelier.da...@gmail.com wrote:
2013/12/17 John Marino freebsd.cont...@marino.st:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried
to discourage that
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One user even proudly boasted
that sending email
Am 17.12.2013 23:33, schrieb John Marino:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One
On mar, 17 déc 2013, John Marino wrote:
Over the months I've seen several ports users copy a failure log and
mail it to ports@, usually without even saying hello. I've tried to
discourage that behavior but other members of this mail list encourage
this method of bypassing writing PRs. One
47 matches
Mail list logo
