On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:29:26PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Thanks to the hard work of a number of maintainers and committers
we're making good progress on bringing the ports tree into complete
X11BASE compliance.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 02:14:48PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:29:26PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
[...]
Are you maintainers really going to let your ports be the ones that
hold us up?! You know who you are since you've already received email
about this, so let's
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 07:09:52AM +0800, Rong-En Fan wrote:
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 02:14:48PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 09:29:26PM -0500, Kris Kennaway wrote:
[...]
Are you maintainers really going to let your ports be the ones that
hold us up?! You know who
On Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 09:28:40PM +0800, Rong-En Fan wrote:
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-5-exp-latest/index-maintainer.html
We're now down to fewer than 110 ports that need to be corrected to
deal with a non-standard X11BASE location (the rest are more general
port
Thanks to the hard work of a number of maintainers and committers
we're making good progress on bringing the ports tree into complete
X11BASE compliance.
http://pointyhat.freebsd.org/errorlogs/i386-5-exp-latest/index-maintainer.html
We're now down to fewer than 110 ports that need to be
