From nobody Fri Jan 12 23:28:17 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TBd4z6hfhz56dSg for ; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@catflap.org) Received: from donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net (donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net [IPv6:2001:19f0:7400:8808:123::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TBd4z49B2z4wKX; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jamie@catflap.org) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Catflap-Envelope-From: Received: from donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net (donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net [209.250.224.51]) by donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 40CNSHVp004088; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:17 GMT (envelope-from jamie@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net) Received: (from jamie@localhost) by donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id 40CNSHtv004087; Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:17 GMT (envelope-from jamie) From: Jamie Landeg-Jones Message-Id: <202401122328.40CNSHtv004087@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:17 +0000 Organization: Dyslexic Fish To: jamie@catflap.org, arrowd@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD ports disabled for bsdforge References: <202401111126.40BBQgJ4028906@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> <4ae511b8cf4e21ecfa8b4283ea369f6f@bsdforge.com> <202401121400.40CE04P1085845@donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Heirloom mailx 12.4 7/29/08 List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (donotpassgo.dyslexicfish.net [209.250.224.51]); Fri, 12 Jan 2024 23:28:18 +0000 (GMT) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TBd4z49B2z4wKX X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:20473, ipnet:2001:19f0:7400::/38, country:US] Gleb Popov wrote: > > But I didn't realise it was only 6 days! Jeeze, I have many PR's that haven't > > been looked at it months! > > There is a misconception that portmgr@ is in charge of going through > open unassigned PRs and committing them. But this is actually ports > committers' job. Gleb, I appreciate your calm and rational explanation, but it just seems like something is going on which I am not a part of. I sent the initial mail privately to Chris. He replied, and (quite fairly) CC'd in the ports mailing list. I stupidly didn't notice this when I replied, so I thought I was replying to Chris only. I'd have worded it a bit more diplomatically if I realised it was going to be public. This is not a dig at Chris, it was my stupid fault for not noticing the CC. As it was, it was a cheap quip about the whole situation. I had no clue whether the commits were done by commiters or portmgr or anyone else. If I'd even been thinking about it in a more formal way, I'd have researched in more detail. > At the same time portmgr@ often performs large infrastructure changes > that require fixing hundreds and thousands of ports before landing > them (no one likes when someone else breaks your port, right?). Each > port added to the tree places a maintainership burden not only on an > actual maintainer but also on portmgr@. This makes portmgr@ strive to > eagerly remove ports that are standing in the way of big changes when > their maintainers are lacking time to fix them. Unfortunately this > makes portmgr@ look evil in the eyes of not only maintainers but also > fellow committers. I was just showing my surprise that so many ports were blasted at such short notice. I was not attacking portmgr, or even generally any of the people involved, just that this particular even surprised me. It appears from subsequent emails that there is some internal politics going on here. I don't know Chris, or any of the committers. I just noticed a whole loads of ports marked broken, that when I checked, were not broken, so I sent a message to those concerned to inform them of the fact. Hell, only one of those ports was actually one I was installing, and as I already had the distfile, I could fix it for myself without bothering to contact anyone. It didn't help me personally to point it out. Jamie