portupgrade

[Pav Lucistnik]

On 2010/09/14 07:19, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:

> On 09/14/10 00:38, Stanislav Sedov wrote:
>> there's a branch in projects/ we use for developing pkgtools.
>> This place is exactly where portupgrade-devel comes from.

> I've deleted my user svn portupgrade bits.
>
>> Saying this, I'm absolutely against passing the port to ports at .
>> The reason it's assigned on ruby@ and not ports@ is that we
>> don't want random people committing to this port thus possibly
>> destabilizing the important tool.

> Maybe assign it to new alias/group portupgrade@ then.

Oh please, not another hollow alias.

Since you asked for portmgr's opinion by Ccing this mail...
I personally think the maintainer field should read 'stas' and patches 
should be gated through him. Usual maintainer timeouts apply.

-- 
Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
               <pav at FreeBSD.org>