On Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:00:04 +0100
Thomas Zander thomas.e.zan...@googlemail.com wrote:
But the takeaway is that we can't expect the PR submitters, or even
port maintainers, to get anything right. It sure makes life easier
when they do, but we can't take it for granted.
As committers, we
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 10:35:12AM -0500, Michael Scheidell wrote:
the solution would be for the submitter to work with the maintainer
on a solution, or am I supposed to fix this without reversing this?
In general each of us, as committers, is responsible for whatever side-
effects of the
On 1/19/12 12:04 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:
So if there's breakage, then it needs to be first understood, then
dealt with. If there is no other way than the horrible backout/PORTEPOCH
dance, then so be it.
But the takeaway is that we can't expect the PR submitters, or even
port maintainers, to
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 18:04, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
So if there's breakage, then it needs to be first understood, then
dealt with. If there is no other way than the horrible backout/PORTEPOCH
dance, then so be it.
That's correct.
However I think that in this situation
On 19/01/2012 18:00, Thomas Zander wrote:
It was not the first temporary build problem that one of
the 15k ports has and it certainly won't be the last.
23k
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 19:03, Matthew Seaman
m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk wrote:
On 19/01/2012 18:00, Thomas Zander wrote:
It was not the first temporary build problem that one of
the 15k ports has and it certainly won't be the last.
23k
Sorry, I must have lost count some time in 2005
update
(1.0.r20111218) conflicts with devel/ncurses
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 16:21:42 +0100
From: eha...@freebsd.org
To: thomas.e.zan...@googlemail.com, eha...@freebsd.org,
eha...@freebsd.org, scheid...@freebsd.org
Synopsis: multimedia/mplayer: last update (1.0.r20111218) conflicts
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 16:35, Michael Scheidell scheid...@freebsd.org wrote:
tell me you want me to revert this patch, and do a portepoch.
the solution would be for the submitter to work with the maintainer on a
solution, or am I supposed to fix this without reversing this?
Let's all calm
