On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 15:07, Adam McLaurin wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:07:06 -0700
> Joe Kelsey <email@example.com> wrote:
> > What are you talking about? I run 4-STABLE, no message in UPDATING!
> That was committed almost 22 hours ago, and clearly states the new
> Firefox requirement.
> > I do not find any reason that I need to monitor ports@ or to read CVS
> > commit messages, unless you have chosen to create a brand-new
> > requirement out of whole cloth that says that I need to monitor ports@
> > all of a sudden.
> > If you make a change like this in a standard gnome application, you
> > need to at least mention it on the gnome@ list or somehow make it a
> > requirement that everyone who monitors gnome@ no has to *also* monitor
> > ports@.
> Yet another moron that slaps the hand that feeds him ...
> This is the exact reason why UPDATING was created (3 months ago!), and
I regularly read gnome@, but I apparantly did not see a message
announcing /usr/ports/UPDATING. It has only existed for 3 months, and I
feel certain that at least one or two other people have missed the
existance of this file.
If you really want people to notice something, you have to rub it in
their faces for quite a while before some of us stumble across it. I
regret that I did not know that this file existed. However, I think
that for the first *year* that a file such as this exists, one should
*loudly* announce a chenge in the file on every single related mailing
list just to give people a chance to notice it. A 3 month old file
cannot ever be considered the last word in anything.
I did not mean to cast aspersions on anyone. I do not think that my
message implied any sort of thing. If anyone involved feels slighted,
please accept my apologies.
> the exact reason you should read it EVERY time you cvsup BEFORE you
> start upgrading ANYTHING. I have even put it in my cvsup script, so
> I'll never forget to read it.