On 2009-5-24 11:17, Scott Haneda wrote:
> On May 23, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>> Committed in r51390.
>
> Thanks. When they are committed, does that mean I have access to them,
> selfupdate would pick them up, or is there some waiting time?
Up to about 30 minutes before it hits rsy
On May 23, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
On 2009-05-24 01:56, Scott Haneda wrote:
From the users list:
Hello, can someone closer to these two ports give me an idea of what
their status is?
http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17709
No patch has been attached. Could you please attach it a
On 2009-05-24 01:56, Scott Haneda wrote:
> From the users list:
>> Hello, can someone closer to these two ports give me an idea of what
>> their status is?
>> http://trac.macports.org/ticket/17709
No patch has been attached. Could you please attach it as it sounds you
are already using it?
>>
Starting to get the feeling someone does not like these two port
files, if that is the case, please let me know...
I posted this to the users list, and have been updating the trac
comments as well:
From the users list:
Hello, can someone closer to these two ports give me an idea of what
t
On May 23, 2009, at 11:27, S. M. Ibrahim (Lavlu) wrote:
i already mailed to portmgr 2 times for commit permission. but never
got any reply from them. i think if you (portmgr) deny my request, i
expect a reply from you with details.
I apologize for the delay. We have been considering your reque
On May 23, 2009, at 9:31 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
If it makes the process more transparent, should we announce new
committers on macports-dev as an introduction to the community?
I think that's a great idea, and one which will also make new
committers feel more, well, welcome!
- Jordan
_
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 06:31:19PM +0200, Rainer M?ller wrote:
> On 2009-05-23 11:11, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > After seeing 2 people volunteer their services as MacPorts committers
> > recently, it occurred to me to wonder just how these sorts of ad-hoc,
> > informal "how can I help?" messa
On 2009-05-23 09:08, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> On May 21, 2009, at 12:29, David Evans wrote:
>> Also I'm not sure why you made it a path dependency. Should this
>> be done globally?
>
> I am getting tired of having to monitor ports' dependencies for
> things like "port:pango" and "port:cairo" and
On 2009-05-23 11:11, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> After seeing 2 people volunteer their services as MacPorts committers
> recently, it occurred to me to wonder just how these sorts of ad-hoc,
> informal "how can I help?" messages are being acted on. If someone
> from project management has alr
2009/5/23 Ryan Schmidt :
>
> On May 23, 2009, at 04:11, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
>> After seeing 2 people volunteer their services as MacPorts committers
>> recently, it occurred to me to wonder just how these sorts of ad-hoc,
>> informal "how can I help?" messages are being acted on. If someone
On 23/mag/09, at 17:10, Luis O'Shea wrote:
See http://trac.macports.org/ticket/19687
Committed in r51375 .
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
On 23/mag/09, at 16:12, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
I don't believe this change was correct. The files are in fact still
located in the archive subdirectory, as far as I can tell.
Definitely, I misread and thought it was homepage instead.
Fixed in r51374 .
--
Andrea
__
See http://trac.macports.org/ticket/19687
Thanks.
Luis
___
macports-dev mailing list
macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
On May 23, 2009, at 09:01, and.dam...@macports.org wrote:
-master_siteshttp://opencircuitdesign.com/irsim/archive/
+master_siteshttp://opencircuitdesign.com/irsim/
I don't believe this change was correct. The files are in fact still
located in the archive subdirectory, as fa
On May 23, 2009, at 04:11, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
After seeing 2 people volunteer their services as MacPorts
committers recently, it occurred to me to wonder just how these
sorts of ad-hoc, informal "how can I help?" messages are being
acted on. If someone from project management has al
Livecheck intentionally only tells you that the versions *differ*. This
information is useful whether the portfile version is older or newer
than the one from the web: in the former case the port needs updating,
and in the latter case the livecheck needs fixing.
On 2009-5-23 17:48, Jeremy Lavergne
Hi guys (core?),
After seeing 2 people volunteer their services as MacPorts committers
recently, it occurred to me to wonder just how these sorts of ad-hoc,
informal "how can I help?" messages are being acted on. If someone
from project management has already quietly followed up to those f
On May 23, 2009, at 02:48, Jeremy Lavergne wrote:
On May 23, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Unless there's a special reason you downgraded the version, you
should revert this change. 0.9.27 is from August 2008 while 0.9.5
is from September 2006.
Nope, the only reason was I trusted
Nope, the only reason was I trusted livecheck.
My apologies.
On May 23, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
Unless there's a special reason you downgraded the version, you
should revert this change. 0.9.27 is from August 2008 while 0.9.5 is
from September 2006.
smime.p7s
Description:
On May 21, 2009, at 12:29, David Evans wrote:
ryandes...@macports.org wrote:
--- trunk/dports/gnome/gnome-platform-suite/Portfile 2009-05-09
20:16:23 UTC (rev 50796)
+++ trunk/dports/gnome/gnome-platform-suite/Portfile 2009-05-09
20:40:52 UTC (rev 50797)
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
homepage
On May 22, 2009, at 15:17, Darren Weber wrote:
Some revisions on the tcl code above are required because it seems
that ${prefix} is not defined when the proc is defined in a global
scope for a Portfile (not clear why that is the case).
Try adding "global prefix" at the top of the proc.
_
On May 23, 2009, at 01:47, s...@macports.org wrote:
Revision: 51342
http://trac.macports.org/changeset/51342
Author: s...@macports.org
Date: 2009-05-22 23:47:39 -0700 (Fri, 22 May 2009)
Log Message:
---
updated version
Unless there's a special reason you downgraded the
22 matches
Mail list logo
