Hi!
> I don't think I makes sense to put it back to pool or tj@ is resetted
> for elasticsearch ports. So someone other can take all elasticsearch
>
> port. As I wrote in my first answer: it is better one maintainer make
> all elasticsearch ports. So please but tj@ for the moment back as
>
>
I don't think I makes sense to put it back to pool or tj@ is resetted
for elasticsearch ports. So someone other can take all elasticsearch
port. As I wrote in my first answer: it is better one maintainer make
all elasticsearch ports. So please but tj@ for the moment back as
maintainer.
On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 09:49:24AM +0100, Walter Schwarzenfeld wrote:
> No, that's a misunderstood. Let the maintainer for the port (I don't
> really want the port). It is better one maintainer make all elastisearch
>
> ports. It was a request on FreeBSD Forum for elasticsearch6. First I
>
No, that's a misunderstood. Let the maintainer for the port (I don't
really want the port). It is better one maintainer make all elastisearch
ports. It was a request on FreeBSD Forum for elasticsearch6. First I
updated elasticsearch5 and as I was "in work" I make the PR for
elasticsearch6.
Adding concerned people in the loop.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 07:25:35PM -0500, John W. O'Brien wrote:
> I'm glad to see this in the tree and appreciate the work pi@ and
> w.schwarzenfeld have done.
>
> I'm puzzled about why tj@, who is AWOL, ended up as maintainer. Could
> somebody help me
I'm glad to see this in the tree and appreciate the work pi@ and
w.schwarzenfeld have done.
I'm puzzled about why tj@, who is AWOL, ended up as maintainer. Could
somebody help me understand this?
$ svn log -c 461559 /usr/ports | egrep "^r[0-9]|Submitted"
r461559 | pi | 2018-02-12 01:49:48 -0500
