#26796 closed update (fixed)
Patch to upgrade py26-dulwich from 0.4.1 to 0.6.1
| Reported by: | mallman (Michael Allman) | Owned by: | ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | ports | Version: | |
| Keywords: | haspatch | Cc: | mail_ben_schmidt@… |
| Port: | py26-dulwich |
Description
Attached is a patch to update the py26-dulwich port to 0.6.1
Attachments (1)
Change History (7)
Changed 14 years ago by mallman (Michael Allman)
| Attachment: | py26-dulwich.patch added |
|---|
comment:1 Changed 14 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
| Cc: | mail_ben_schmidt@… added |
|---|---|
| Owner: | changed from macports-tickets@… to ryandesign@… |
| Status: | new → assigned |
Has duplicate #26770 which was already open for 3 days.
comment:2 Changed 14 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
Updated in r72329 (maintainer timeout).
comment:3 Changed 14 years ago by mail_ben_schmidt@…
Sorry I didn't reply earlier.
The patch is, of course, fine by me. Great that it's been committed.
The main reason I didn't reply is that I don't have commit access, so can't really do anything about this. It surprised me that a Portfile was added to the system referencing me without giving me some kind of access.
I would be happy to maintain this and a handful of other ports (e.g. ticket #23634 which still hasn't made it in yet) if commit access can be arranged. If not, it probably is a dumb idea to have me listed as maintainer and someone else should take it on, or do maintenance solely through requests here.
comment:4 Changed 14 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
It is our usual procedure for port maintainers to not have commit access until they've been port maintainers for awhile. All you need to do if you want something committed is to file a ticket and attach your diff and it will be reviewed. All you need to do, if someone submits a diff for your port and you agree it should be committed, is to say so in the ticket.
comment:5 Changed 14 years ago by mail_ben_schmidt@…
Fair enough. And review is certainly a great idea, particularly when newbies like me are involved! My main concern here is turnaround time, though. So far, it has been 3-4 months+ for anything to happen with my tickets (agreeably they were for new submissions--but ticket #23634 has still not been touched for 4 months since I responded within 1 day to the review). Is there any way to speed this up? It is a farce to say someone is maintaining a port if there's no guarantee they can do anything about it, potentially for months; plus it reflects badly on the maintainer through no fault of their own.
comment:6 Changed 14 years ago by ryandesign (Ryan Carsten Schmidt)
Sorry for the delay. Your other ticket was clearly forgotten. As you see from my comments in #23634 your submission had to be changed in several ways before it could be committed. This took time and effort for me to do. Others may have looked at your ticket before, noticed some of these problems, and decided they did not have the time to make those changes at that time. Unfortunately many tickets are filed and we have a limited number of people who are looking at them who each have limited time to work on MacPorts, for which they are not paid. As you learn more portfile writing conventions and submit portfiles that require fewer changes before committing, hopefully there will be quicker turnaround. Diffs are also usually quicker to review and commit than complete new portfiles. If you file other tickets which are not acted upon in a timely fashion you can send a message to the macports-dev mailing list to remind us. Any further discussion about MacPorts policies or practices such as this should be had on macports-dev, not in a ticket.
patch file