On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 09:37:12PM +0200, Rene Ladan wrote: > On 08-08-2010 21:30, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > >On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 05:59:36PM +0000, Rene Ladan wrote: > >>rene 2010-08-08 17:59:36 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD ports repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> games/stonesoup Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist > >> games/stonesoup/files patch-AppHdr.h patch-makefile > >> Added files: > >> games/stonesoup/files patch-rltiles__Makefile > >> Log: > >> - Update to 0.7.1 > >> - Split off SDL version into games/stonesoup-sdl slave port > >> - Note the new WWW site in pkg-descr > > > >What was wrong with having SDL support in OPTIONS? PR does not give > >sufficient details. > > > >We generally try to avoid creating slaves unless fairly strong reason > >exist. Lots of ports optionally support SDL, imagine the numbers if we > >factored it all out in to slaves. > > > Actually there is nothing wrong with having SDL support in OPTIONS, I > merely followed the PR. If you can convince the maintainer to revert > factoring out SDL support, I'll be happy to make the corresponding commit.
I will try, but this is not how it normally works: we do not blindly commit one's submissions. Submitter may be not aware about all possible implications their diff has; it is the committer's responsibility to make sure every part of proposed diff has it merits. Saying "I merely followed the PR" is definitely not enough. ./danfe _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
