On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
For some reason, people contributing to this mailing list are
getting frustrated because some of the applications are now getting
to be about a month old. But why should we expect to have the
latest and greatest in version number of application? It is
because this is what we usually have, and so a periodic hiccup is
out of the ordinary and so frustrates us.
But suppose you are running Red Hat Linux instead. Do you also get
the latest and greatest in this super timely manner? (To be
honest this is not a rhetorical question, but my guess is "no.")
In fact, who feels this frustration. Is it the ordinary user? Or
is it us port maintainers who wish they could get their more recent
PR's accepted?
Surely this frustration is felt by us because we have information
that things could be a little more up to date. But if we weren't
in the know, then we wouldn't be so upset.
I am not suggesting we do a major overhaul before ports are
unfrozen... what I am suggesting is there is always room for
improvement and the frustrations voiced should be looked as an
opportunity to improve it instead of us (the complainers) crying in
our milk.
I feel that your deflection of the points I made was a little unfair.
My question is - why exactly is there a frustration? Is it because the
FreeBSD community have somehow set expectations to be "totally up to date"
a little too high? Are we simply expecting more from FreeBSD than we get
from Linux distributions or MS, simply because the average user has
tremendous knowledge and insight into the internal development process?
Remember, I'm just an average user, just like you. I have no special axe
to grind in defending FreeBSD.
Stephen
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
