Re: sysutils/nut maintainer mail rejection

Hi Cy,

On 2024-01-25 17:07, Cy Schubert wrote:
> In message
<CAOaF7tMgiZ37s0vLsTtW1at92C-qpeo7kKtg+nutcREV92ECPg@mail.gmail.c
> om>
> , Tom Rushworth writes:
[snip]
>>
>> Which port should I use - sysutils/nut or sysutils/nut-devel ?  So far
>> the only changes needed are to drivers/Makefile.am and the actual new
>> driver source.
>
> I won't accept a patch for an experimental driver until a pull request to
> our upstream has been submitted first, then only to the -devel port. If
> they refuse to accept the patch, I will need to remove it from the port as
> well.
All reasonable.
>
> Another option may be to add an option for an experimental driver from
> which we can fetch your sources from. You'd need to provide a URL. I'm not
> prepared to add the patch cart blanche because if it breaks I'm not
> prepared to diagnose and debug it for you.
Too much work for something there might be no-one else using.  There can't
be too many CFR1500's out there, and even fewer in the FreeBSD world :).
>
> Preferred is an upstream pull request. Their URL is
> https://github.com/networkupstools/nut.
I'll go that route.
>
> BTW, I found the problematic postfix rule and have fixed it. Sorry about
> the bother.
It wasn't a bother, I'm the one asking for stuff after all.

This message will work as a test :)
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
> FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
> NTP:           <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org
>
> e^(i*pi)+1=0
>
>
>
Thanks for your time!
--
Tom Rushworth