irc/xchat: limit icon blinking time

[Pav Lucistnik]

The policy is: there is no policy.

If the given port maintainer wants to add a non-official patch to
provide extra functionality, he is free to do so. (Look at qmail ports.)

If a port maintainer does not want to have specific patch in his port,
he can reject it. (In the end, it would be him to support the patch over
future upgrades etc..)


Eitan Adler píše v so 23. 06. 2012 v 21:00 -0700:
> Adding portmgr here to cc: should we accept new patches which add
> additional features or fix upstream bugs, not specific to us, as local
> FreeBSD ports trees patches?
> 
> On 23 June 2012 18:45, Doug Barton <dougb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > Several of my ports, to start with. Which is why I'm concerned at your
> > attempt to change policy by fiat.
> 
> I'm not attempting to change anything. FWIW, why don't you upstream
> the patches in your ports?
> 
> >> Our own stuff is completely unrelated. The question at hand is do we
> >> continue development of third party software by means of patches to
> >> the ports tree?
> >> And the answer has always been, "Yes." I have no idea where you got any
> > other idea.
> 
> As I understand it the answer has always been no: we don't continue
> development of third party software in ports more than necessary to
> make it function on FreeBSD.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
-- 
Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
              <pav at FreeBSD.org>
> Why do we need a film of "Lord of the Rings" when we have the book?
Because watching a cg enhanced Legolas fire a flaming arrow into the
heart of a warg is cool? - asdf at asdf.com in rec.games.roguelike.angband
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/attachments/20120624/668782e4/attachment.pgp