cvs commit: ports/games/quake2lnx Makefile distinfo pkg-message pkg-plist ports/games/quake2lnx/files extra-patch-src_rogue_g__local.h extra-patch-src_rogue_q__shared.c extra-patch-src_xatrix_q__shared.c patch-Makefile patch-src::game::g_phys.c patch-src::linux::gl_glx.c patch-src::linux::rw_in_svgalib.c ...

[Mark Linimon]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 01:54:27PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > So why have you not handled the PR yourself? Is 36 days really not
> > enough to sort out a single port PR?
> 
> I can tolerate "maintainer timeout" for really inactive committer, but
> not for someone doing commits and being active in the lists.

Then you should have put the PR into 'suspended' and/or somehow indicated
that you were working on an alternative solution to the problem.

portmgr has been fairly lax with the 2-week and 3-month timeouts but IMHO
this is also part of the reason we have several hundred PRs that just sit
in GNATS forever.  I have slowly been working through the backlog and
intend to do more.

We do have a number of maintainers who ignore certain of their ports
while staying active in other areas and there is no external way of
telling the difference between 'I have objections to this change' and
'I am ignoring this change' other than email or GNATS.

The bottom line is that if people want to flag changes like this they
are well advised to use 'suspended'.

mcl