the right next step?

Hi everybody!

If we've

 i)   raised a question about a port on this list
 ii)  sent an email to the port maintainer
 iii) filed a pr
 iv)  waited ~ a month, then followed-up the pr

and there's still no communication / action, what's the
right next
step?  Is there a different list to communicate to/on for
follow-up?

Thanks a lot!

Ali
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Aliya Harbouri wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
> If we've
>
>  i)   raised a question about a port on this list
>  ii)  sent an email to the port maintainer
>  iii) filed a pr
>  iv)  waited ~ a month, then followed-up the pr
>
> and there's still no communication / action, what's the
right next
> step?  Is there a different list to communicate to/on
for follow-up?

Does your PR include a fix?

If it does, make some noise about it on the freebsd-ports
mailing list and 
include the PR number and the fact that you've not heard
back from the 
maintainer.

If it doesn't, you might still want to bring it up on
-ports, but getting it 
fixed depends on someone volunteering to take ownership of
the problem (if 
not outright maintainership of the port).

JN
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

John Nielsen <listsjnielsen.net> wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 23 October 2007, Aliya Harbouri wrote:
> > Hi everybody!
> >
> > If we've
> >
> >  i)   raised a question about a port on this list
> >  ii)  sent an email to the port maintainer
> >  iii) filed a pr
> >  iv)  waited ~ a month, then followed-up the pr
> >
> > and there's still no communication / action,
what's the right next
> > step?  Is there a different list to communicate
to/on for follow-up?
> 
> Does your PR include a fix?
> 
> If it does, make some noise about it on the
freebsd-ports mailing list and 
> include the PR number and the fact that you've not
heard back from the 
> maintainer.
> 
> If it doesn't, you might still want to bring it up on
-ports, but getting it 
> fixed depends on someone volunteering to take ownership
of the problem (if 
> not outright maintainership of the port).

Note also that a ports freeze is starting soon for 7.0 and
6.3 release.
During the freeze, you'll have difficulty getting any ports
changes
through.

-- 
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech
.com
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

Hi John!

> Does your PR include a fix?

Well, I've sent my suggestion to the maintainer -- I don't
know if
it's the *right* fix for the general port.  But, it works
for me as a
workaround.

For what it's worth, in this particular case, I've simply
asked that
the www/apache22 port be made compatible with (aware of?)
the now
standard, port-installed Berkeley DB version 4.6.

> If it does, make some noise about it on the
freebsd-ports mailing list and
> include the PR number and the fact that you've not
heard back from the
> maintainer.

Ok, Thanks.

> If it doesn't, you might still want to bring it up on
-ports, but getting it
> fixed depends on someone volunteering to take ownership
of the problem (if
> not outright maintainership of the port).

Well, I guess I'll just have to see.

Seems to me that apache22 + bdb46, both being in the ports
tree and
both being rather 'popular', that *someone* else would be
interested
as well.  But, apparently, not (yet).

Thanks a lot!

Ali
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

Hi Bill!

> Note also that a ports freeze is starting soon for 7.0
and 6.3 release.
> During the freeze, you'll have difficulty getting any
ports changes
> through.

That's what I figured -- and why I've been trying to
communicate about
this for ~ a month already.

It's not really that *I* have an issue with a workaound --
*that* I
can always do "locally".  But I've recommended
FreeBSD ports be used
"out of the box" for  installs around here.

I can understand non-functional / troublesome ports for some
obscure
packages, but a working apache22 + bdb46 combo seemed a
rather "basic"
and not-unreasonable expectation.

My own fault for *making* the recommendation, I know.

I'll keep trying to get somone to look at this.

Thanks a lot!

Ali
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 07:43:37AM -0700, Aliya Harbouri
wrote:

> Hi Bill!
> 
> > Note also that a ports freeze is starting soon for
7.0 and 6.3 release.
> > During the freeze, you'll have difficulty getting
any ports changes
> > through.
> 
> That's what I figured -- and why I've been trying to
communicate about
> this for ~ a month already.
> 
> It's not really that *I* have an issue with a workaound
-- *that* I
> can always do "locally".  But I've
recommended FreeBSD ports be used
> "out of the box" for  installs around here.
> 
> I can understand non-functional / troublesome ports for
some obscure
> packages, but a working apache22 + bdb46 combo seemed a
rather "basic"
> and not-unreasonable expectation.
> 
> My own fault for *making* the recommendation, I know.

I am not sure I understand all of what is being said or
implied here.
Ports is the recommended way of doing installs of third
party stuff.

It also sounds like there is some misunderstanding on the
term ports freeze.
What happens is that for a period before a new release comes
out, all
ports and other things are 'frozen' so that everything can
be built
and tested against the version of things about to be
released.   If
changes keep being applied during that time, then there
would never be
a verifiable release that things could be built against.  
As soon as
the tests pass and the version is released, and some
housekeeping taken
care of, the ports and the rest of things will be unfrozen
and changes
again begun to be applied.    

The release engineering team extablishes the freeze in order
to create
the final builds and tests for a release.  It is not the
ports maintainer
who creates the freeze.   The freeze is temporary.

////jerry

> 
> I'll keep trying to get somone to look at this.
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> Ali
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questionsfreebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-que
stions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-unsubscribefreebsd.org"