ports/76218: [ unbreak ] update biology/molden to 4.3

Fri Jan 14 16:37:40 UTC 2005

+----[ Sergey Matveychuk <sem at FreeBSD.org> (13.Jan.2005 21:26):
|
| State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
| State-Changed-By: sem
| State-Changed-When: Fri Jan 14 00:18:39 GMT 2005
| State-Changed-Why: 
| Ask maintainer for an approval
| 
| http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=76218
|
+----]

I've received identical messages for PRs 76217 and 76219.

Sem,

what do you mean by 'Ask maintainer for an approval'? I
already CCed the maintainers in the PRs, but I don't see you
CCing them when changing state to feedback. Should I send an
explicit message asking for approval? Or is it just a way to
mark the PR as 'waiting for maintainer approval'? Sorry if
I'm not understanding it right.

Regarding PRs 76217 and 76219 (maintainer is Camson Chuynh,
chuynh at biolateral.com.au) I've attached the reply I got from
Piers Wren (biolateral.com's postmaster). Seems like he is
not reachable right now.

Fernan

Subject: Re: [MAILER-DAEMON at blue.biolateralgroup.com: Undelivered Mail
	Returned to Sender]
From: Piers Wren <piers at informic.net>
To: Fernan Aguero <fernan at iib.unsam.edu.ar>
In-Reply-To: <20050113144022.GD23549 at iib.unsam.edu.ar>
References: <20050113144022.GD23549 at iib.unsam.edu.ar>
Content-Type: text/plain
Message-Id: <1105649950.9360.43.camel at hummer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-7) 
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:59:10 +1100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pi.iib.unsam.edu.ar
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,ROUND_THE_WORLD 
	autolearn=no version=3.0.2
Content-Length: 3270

Hi Fernan,

Unfortunately Camson left Biolateral almost 2 years ago. We kept his
email address active as a favour but it appears he has stopped checking
it now.

I don't have a forwarding address, sorry.

Thanks,
-Piers.

On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 01:40, Fernan Aguero wrote:
> Dear postmaster,
> 
> I'm trying to contact Mr. Camson Chuyhn, and the mail system
> is bouncing my messages with the following error: file too
> large.
> 
> However, I'm just sending a plain text message with no
> attachments, which is only a few Ks in size.
> 
> Is there an alternative address that I can use? Or else
> could you fix the problem?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Fernan Aguero
> 
> ----- Forwarded message from Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON at blue.biolateralgroup.com> -----
> 
> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:28:06 -0500 (EST)
> From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON at blue.biolateralgroup.com>
> Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
> To: fernan at iib.unsam.edu.ar
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
> 	ROUND_THE_WORLD_LOCAL autolearn=ham version=3.0.2
> 
> Content-Description: Notification
> This is the Postfix program at host blue.biolateralgroup.com.
> 
> I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned
> below could not be delivered to one or more destinations.
> 
> For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>
> 
> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
> delete your own text from the message returned below.
> 
> 			The Postfix program
> 
> <chuynh at biolateral.com.au>: cannot access mailbox /var/mail/chuynh for user
>     chuynh. error writing message: File too large
> 
> Content-Description: Delivery error report
> Reporting-MTA: dns; blue.biolateralgroup.com
> Arrival-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:28:05 -0500 (EST)
> 
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; chuynh at biolateral.com.au
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.0.0
> Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; cannot access mailbox /var/mail/chuynh for user
>     chuynh. error writing message: File too large
> 
> Content-Description: Undelivered Message
> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 11:27:15 -0300
> From: Fernan Aguero <fernan at iib.unsam.edu.ar>
> To: chuynh at biolateral.com.au
> Subject: update of artemis/act ports
> 
> Dear Camson,
> 
> I have a patch to update the artemis port to the latest
> version (v6). However, since you're the maintainer, I'd like
> to discuss with you the update of the act port.
> 
> The distfile for act is now the same as for artemis
> (different names, but same size and checksum). Both ports
> install the same files, except for one executable (art or
> act, depending on the port). Thus, it would be really
> advantageous to keep only one port and install both
> executables. 
> 
> I already contacted Tim Carver @sanger and he said that the
> software is expected to continue to be packaged this way in
> the future.
> 
> I'd vote for removal of the act port, but it could also be
> made a slave port (just installing a single executable), or
> else leave it there, but marked as IGNORE with a clear
> message.
> 
> Please let me know what you think,
> 
> Fernan
> 
> 
> ----- End forwarded message -----
---
Make a man a fire and he'll be warm for a night.
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.