[Slackbuilds-users] New policy or poor advice?

[Matteo Bernardini]

Hi David,

the case you describe is substantially different: in april 2021 SBo closed
submissions and start adapting things to build on current to start getting
ready for the soon-to-come 15.0 (rc1 had been already released).
When we close submissions, differently from the normal developmrnt cycle,
we admins patch everything needed without getting in touch with the single
maintainers (accepting patches from maintainers and third parties) because
it's not possibile to get in touch with everybody for every script with
thousands of scripts to fix moving from one stable release of Slackware to
another so the goal is to handle at least the build process for most of
them so that at least they can be tested for functionality by the
respective maintainers (we also accept patches from them at some point).
That's the reason why rogue has been patched in may 2021.

Matteo

Il ven 3 giu 2022, 12:09 David Chmelik <davidnchmelik at gmail.com> ha scritto:

> Someone pushed a patch for previous rogue.tar.gz version on GitHub.com,
> which I don't (and won't) even use for my SlackBuilds.  I only found out
> when sbopkg & sbotools said Rogue was already updated on SBo without me
> having updated Rogue.  I didn't obscure/anti-spam my email in rogue.info
> nor was inactive--in fact was aware of the problem because of testing my
> builds on Slackware-current--perhaps people were just catching up after
> Slackware 15.  I thanked the person for patch but asked them in future
> to email first.
>
> On 6/3/22 1:20 AM, Matteo Bernardini wrote:
> > hi David,
> >
> > could you please detail when and how this happened so we could try to
> > give an answer?
> >
> > Matteo
> >
> > Il giorno ven 3 giu 2022 alle ore 10:08 David Chmelik
> > <davidnchmelik at gmail.com <mailto:davidnchmelik at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
> >
> >     It happened to me once also.  A patch was needed, but the person who
> >     submitted it didn't even try to contact me, so didn't know I was also
> >     updating to newer source code that didn't need the patch.
> >
> >     On 6/3/22 12:59 AM, Matteo Bernardini wrote:
> >     > hi Chris,
> >     >
> >     > I suppose there has been a misunderstanding as nothing changed
> >     in our
> >     > general policy.
> >     >
> >     > Matteo
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > Il giorno ven 3 giu 2022 alle ore 01:19 Christoph Willing
> >     > <chris.willing at linux.com <mailto:chris.willing at linux.com>
> >     <mailto:chris.willing at linux.com <mailto:chris.willing at linux.com>>>
> >     ha scritto:
> >     >
> >     >     I just noticed one of the SlackBuilds that I maintain
> >     sitting in the
> >     >     pending queue even though I'd made no changes.
> >     >
> >     >     When discussing this with the person who made the
> >     submission, pointing
> >     >     out the need to first contact the maintainer, they said that:
> >     >             "I've gotten some different advice from one of the
> >     admins
> >     >     for certain
> >     >     situations"
> >     >
> >     >     Is this a new policy - that "for certain situations" anyone can
> >     >     arbitrarily submit changes for a SlackBuild?
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >     chris
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> https://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
> Archives - https://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - https://slackbuilds.org/faq/
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/attachments/20220603/0aa918d4/attachment.htm>