- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
Advanced Search
Sep 27 2022
fluffy@ approved this on behalf of desktop in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=254322#c3 .
Sep 11 2022
Sep 9 2022
Sep 5 2022
Aug 3 2022
Jul 6 2022
Thank you for thinking of our users impacted negatively, Lorenzo.
Jul 5 2022
Jul 4 2022
In D25296#809250, @salvadore wrote:I have not received any reply to my mail and more than a month has passed. I abandon the revision.
Jun 27 2022
Jun 21 2022
Jun 19 2022
Jun 6 2022
In D35416#803163, @salvadore wrote:I confirm that %%SQLITE%% is still needed and I have put it back.
Jun 4 2022
Jun 2 2022
Approved with PORTREVISION bump added. (Technically that bump could be made conditional on i386, but that kind of conditional has proven to be a maintenance issue that's probably not worth the hassle, so I'd do it unconditionally.)
In D35361#801714, @salvadore wrote:I was unsure about bumping PORTREVISION or not. I choosed not to do it because:
- with the actual default version of GCC (10) the port fully supports SSL, even on i386;
May 29 2022
Thank you for the review, @thierry!
Lorenzo, I just realized this one's still open. What next steps would you like to take?
May 26 2022
In D35321#800838, @bcran wrote:I'll try and contact someone on IRC or Slack if there's a next time. Not being a ports committer I can't commit fixes directly.
Hi Rebecca, changes like this don't need review. It's best to commit them as quickly as possible since otherwise make index is broken.
May 22 2022
And I think spending much time on ports related to HPC and scientific computing specifically to get them to work on i386 is mostly wasted time.
May 21 2022
Hi Rebecca, intuitively this look good and you being our resident expert - do you want to go ahead and commit this?
I trust that you tested the LICENSE_DISTFILES magic. :-)
May 19 2022
Thank you - please note the minor comment I made regarding full stops.
May 16 2022
mat@ wrote:
We don't have legal knowledge sufficient to determine if the file actually contains a license named FOO
May 15 2022
"consistently" -> "consistent" in the commit message.
May 10 2022
Some minor suggestions for the actual text (and as you mentioned out of band you'll adjust the date bit).
May 7 2022
In D35112#796718, @carlavilla wrote:Approved from docs
In the commit message you probably want to mention the LICENSE_FILE change, and adding some Why? for the compiler:c++17-lang addition probably would be useful.
May 6 2022
Thanks. And, yes, differentiating between GPL 2 and GPL 2 or later is the right thing to do.
May 5 2022
Yes, I meant to note approval earlier, Lorenzo.
May 4 2022
Regarding storing the actual license file: If we are looking at a vanilla, 100% standard license file (for GPLv2 say) then I strongly recommend to not ship yet another copy and just notice the license as such.
May 3 2022
In D35031#795789, @salvadore wrote:Also, what is the general rule here? Should I avoid putting development dependencies in BUILD_DEPENDS in general? Should I avoid it only when something is wrong about them?
May 1 2022
Apr 30 2022
Apr 27 2022
Thank you, Salvadore!
Apr 26 2022
Wow, from 3.6.1 to 6.0.3? That port really was abandoned.
Apr 24 2022
In D35026#793792, @salvadore wrote:trying to work with the poudriere maintainers to make it support longer filenames, but I have no idea if the fix is possible and/or easy.
Maybe the best idea is to combine solutions: trying to work with poudriere maintainers to make it support longer filenames
In D34942#793912, @carlavilla wrote:Perfect! In that case. Approved from docs :)
Thanks for putting this together! Just some text suggestions/feedback.
Thanks for the review, danfe@!
Looks good (aka approved) modulo the one comment about dynamic libraries.
Apr 22 2022
Apr 21 2022
In D35015#793410, @salvadore wrote:Thanks, I'll commit it as soon as I get mentor approval too.
Apr 19 2022
Approved wearing my mentor hat - for the actual commit deferring to the docs pros. :-)
Apr 18 2022
Apr 17 2022
Apr 16 2022
Apr 15 2022
Mar 21 2022
Mar 17 2022
Mar 16 2022
Mar 12 2022
Mar 11 2022
Mar 2 2022
Feb 26 2022
Feb 25 2022
Feb 4 2022
Feb 1 2022
Jan 28 2022
Jan 26 2022
Jan 23 2022
Jan 21 2022
Jan 13 2022
Jan 10 2022
Jan 9 2022
Dec 31 2021
Dec 30 2021
Dec 21 2021
Oh, sorry. I though you actually are a ports committer and hence only briefly provided feedback.
Dec 20 2021
Dec 19 2021
Dec 18 2021
Dec 15 2021
Dec 12 2021
In D33391#754991, @bcran wrote:Is it valid to reset PORTEPOCH to 1 when updating the PORTVERSION?
Dec 11 2021
Dec 8 2021
Dec 6 2021
Dec 5 2021
Dec 4 2021
Dec 3 2021
Dec 2 2021
Dec 1 2021
Nov 30 2021
Nov 28 2021
Nov 25 2021
Nov 24 2021
Nov 23 2021
Nov 22 2021
Nov 21 2021
Nov 20 2021
Nov 19 2021
Committed (with some tweaks).