Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Yeah, sounds fine to me. > On Jul 19, 2017, at 05:58, Romain Tartière wrote: > > Hi Steve, > > I was thinking about also moving the mcollective* ports under the > puppet@ hat. Do you think it makes sense? > > Romain > > -- > Romain Tartière

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Hi Steve, I was thinking about also moving the mcollective* ports under the puppet@ hat. Do you think it makes sense? Romain -- Romain Tartière http://people.FreeBSD.org/~romain/ pgp: 8234 9A78 E7C0 B807 0B59 80FF BA4D 1D95 5112 336F (ID: 0x5112336F) (plain text

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 03:39:24PM +, Jason Slagle wrote: > So as a relatively green maintainer, what IS the process of updating a port > if you don't have commit yourself? Simply by openning a PR and attaching a diff to the port (instead of a shar file for a new port).

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

So as a relatively green maintainer, what IS the process of updating a port if you don't have commit yourself? On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:13 AM Romain Tartière wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 02:48:36PM +, Jason Slagle wrote: > > We could idle in #puppet-dev on the

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 02:48:36PM +, Jason Slagle wrote: > We could idle in #puppet-dev on the Puppet slack - I asked them to create > us a FreeBSD channel but Meg (community manager) isn't up yet. Just joined as @smortex. Feel free to invite me when the channel is created. Thanks! --

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:54:02AM -0400, Steve Wills wrote: > Given there are 3 committers involved with puppet stuff (Romain, Tom, > and now Zach), perhaps changes from non-committers will get reviewed > fairly quickly and the git repo won't be needed? I quite agree. The first idea behind the

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Given there are 3 committers involved with puppet stuff (Romain, Tom, and now Zach), perhaps changes from non-committers will get reviewed fairly quickly and the git repo won't be needed? Steve On 07/18/2017 10:51, Tom Judge wrote: > I'm happy to move these (my ports) to puppet@ however I would

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

I'm happy to move these (my ports) to puppet@ however I would rather not see a git repo put in the way. TJ > On Jul 18, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Romain Tartière wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 01:09:41PM +, Jason Slagle wrote: >> I have no issue giving up my

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:31:25PM +0200, Romain Tartière wrote: On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 07:25:58AM -0700, Zach wrote: Out of currosity, does the new version ship with ipaddress facts for the interfaces? Yup. Here is the information for lo0 because it's short and have some information: Oh

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 07:25:58AM -0700, Zach wrote: > Out of currosity, does the new version ship with ipaddress facts for the > interfaces? Yup. Here is the information for lo0 because it's short and have some information: -- 8<

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Had you an opportunity to check the updated facter in my proposal? I am running this on my boxes as a replacement of rubygem-facter and it seems to be fine. Out of currosity, does the new version ship with ipaddress facts for the interfaces? -- Zach signature.asc Description: PGP

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 01:09:41PM +, Jason Slagle wrote: > I have no issue giving up my maintainership if someone with commit wants > it, but would also be interested in helping if a puppet@ was formed - I > took maintainership to try to get some traction but pretty quickly hit some >

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

I have no issue giving up my maintainership if someone with commit wants it, but would also be interested in helping if a puppet@ was formed - I took maintainership to try to get some traction but pretty quickly hit some upstream roadblocks that weren't easily solved in a way that the ports tree

Re: [CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Hello all, Because of a transient mail problem, Zach Leslie replied to me privately. With his authorization, I copy here some bits of his reply so that all maintainers have the same information. On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 11:26:45AM -0700, Zach Leslie wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 8:32 AM,

[CFT] Bringing in Puppet 5

Hello, I am contacting you because you are the maintainer of one of these ports: - devel/leatherman (jsla...@gmail.com) - devel/cpp-hocon (jsla...@gmail.com) - sysutils/facter (r...@freebsd.org) - databases/puppetdb3 (free...@zleslie.info) - databases/puppetdb4 (t...@freebsd.org) -