On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 06:26:45PM -0300, Elias M. Mariani wrote: > I thought about it. > I think that is possible to have a tracking system. > Where people would send the ports, have some minimal auto-check of > common errors and to give some people the rights to ask for fix some > things, report test results, commit to the CVS or just reject the > port. > The thing is that ports@ doesn't seem to be that structured, is more > chaotic but thanks to that is also more free for the people to select > what to review, test or commit. > I think that the only "problem" is when the ports gets lost in the > noise of the list, for example, I like to help testing when I can and > not having a list of ports looking for testing is kind of annoying, > maybe things would get committed faster with people giving test > results. > > I would like to make the "submission tracking system", I even thought > about interfacing it with the mailing list, but for now I'm trying to > help here and be sure about the workings of the current system before > doing something that doesn't get used.
Don't reinvent the square wheel, there's http://jk.ozlabs.org/projects/patchwork/ that's used for tracking linux kernel patches. But as stuart said this is not a technical problem, it's an organizational one.. Landry
