Chuck Swiger wrote on 28-12-2006 20:20: > Ion-Mihai IOnut Tetcu wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:53:34 -0500 >> Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> However, sometimes mail systems go down or block traffic for whatever >>> reason: postmaster's job is a thankless task, and this was true even >>> before spam and viral email appeared. Nowadays, it's harder to get >>> things mostly right (nevermind "perfect"), so postmasters make >>> imperfect decisions because they are faced with undesirable tradeoffs. >> >> Indeed :-( >> >> However banning a hole country isn't a tradeoff in my book, it's just >> plain [inset_the_word_here]. And sin[c]e it's giving a 5XX code there's >> really no way to reach the person in question. > > I agree that blocking a whole country is a mistake. Short of posting > to the mailing list, there's no way to reach whoever it is. > > Although I've CC:ed him on the thread. The country-blocks have been in my mail config for ages, and I didn't think of them as I decided to become port maintainer. I understand that it is important as a port maintainer to answer user questions on the port, and so I have, at the moment the blocks became apparent and a nuisance, removed them.
Looks like im going to turn postgrey after all :-) >>> It has not been my observation that insisting people not make any >>> mistakes commonly results in fewer mistakes being made, or much less, >>> in zero mistakes being made. :-) Rather than try to insist they >>> "are not allowed" to do something, I'd prefer to let people make >>> their own decisions and learn which ones are mistakes. YMMV.... >> >> The problem is that, IMHO, this kind of rejecting affects us all as I >> think that being a port maintainer implies receiving and replying to >> users' email. > > Certainly true. > > People doing stuff with FreeBSD ought to whitelist @freebsd.org in > particular; that would make committers lives easier. But email and > even Internet access are not completely reliable; people go away on > vacations sometimes, for a timely example. (Merry Christmas/holidays > all. :-) Ha, good idea! Implemented ... :-) (And a Happy Holidays to you too!) > For a maintainer timeout to be useful, there needs to be a pending PR > and/or someone else willing to be more accessible. Update the current > PR with the bounce and set responsible to Nivo, committing the change > or not as you feel best; or file a new PR listing another maintainer > if one is available and wait for the standard timeout period pending > resolution by the hat-wearing demigods known as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apart from me thinking it may be a bit much to go for maintainer switch right away due to a restrictive mail config, what PR are we talking about now, so that I can have a look into it ;) Greetings, Nils _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
