svn commit: r358722 - head/Mk

[Eitan Adler]

On 23 June 2014 09:54, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 09:37:25AM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> On 23 June 2014 05:45, Baptiste Daroussin <bapt at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:17:19AM -0700, Eitan Adler wrote:
>> >> On 21 June 2014 10:08, Mathieu Arnold <mat at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> >> > Author: mat
>> >> > Date: Sat Jun 21 17:08:34 2014
>> >> > New Revision: 358722
>> >> > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/358722
>> >> > QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r358722/
>> >> >
>> >> > Log:
>> >> >   Add a small notice about maintainership of this file.
>> >> >
>> >> >   With hat:     portmgr
>> >> >   Sponsored by: Absolight
>> >> >
>> >> > Modified:
>> >> >   head/Mk/bsd.options.desc.mk
>> >> >
>> >> > Modified: head/Mk/bsd.options.desc.mk
>> >> > ==============================================================================
>> >> > --- head/Mk/bsd.options.desc.mk Sat Jun 21 17:03:33 2014        (r358721)
>> >> > +++ head/Mk/bsd.options.desc.mk Sat Jun 21 17:08:34 2014        (r358722)
>> >> > @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
>> >> >  #  - OPTION_DESC?= must be 19 characters or less
>> >> >  #  - OPTION description text must be 43 characters or less
>> >> >  #
>> >> > +# - This file's MAINTAINER is ports at FreeBSD.org so that entries can be added to
>> >> > +#   it easily.  Any sweeping changes should be approved by portmgr.
>> >>
>> >> IMHO this is silly.  The risk of changing description text is almost
>> >> zero.  Sweeping changes should be reviewed, but I don't think gating
>> >> the review on a member of portmgr is useful.
>> >>
>> > Given what happened recently on those yes portmgr needs to review those sweep
>>
>> I'll copy what I wrote on phabricator:
>>
>> If anything, the recent commits proved that this statement is exactly
>> opposite of what it should be.
>>
>> People add entries too easily, not realizing that this file is just a
>> default. This means that new entries are often too general or useless.
>>
>> Also, people are too discouraged to change the descriptions when they
>> are useless.
>>
> That is your opinion other people have a different opinion here

What value does portmgr add here over a peer review?  What is the risk here?


-- 
Eitan Adler
Source, Ports, Doc committer
Bugmeister, Ports Security teams