Hi,
I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
have (for source, docs, and especially ports) and attempting to remove
dead code, old cruft, and unneeded checks. Some examples include
ports/155543, port
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
> of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
> have (for source, docs, and especially ports) and attempting to remove
> dead code, old cru
2011/4/1 Eitan Adler :
> Hi,
>
> I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
> of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
> have (for source, docs, and especially ports) and attempting to remove
> dead code, old cruft, and unneeded checks. Some ex
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
>> of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
>> have (for source, d
On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:55:02PM -0400 I heard the voice of
Eitan Adler, and lo! it spake thus:
>
> Not only that but because maintainers would be able to choose the
> best possible configuration for the their port users would no longer
> have to mess around.
This doesn't sound like a good idea
> Hi,
>
> Iâm been working recently on a series of PRs that called âReaper
I'm glad to see that you're helping to clean up.
>
> One of the features that has given us the most trouble has been
> the options framework for ports. We automatically test ports using the
> default options, b
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
> of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
> have (for source, docs, and especially ports) and attempting to remove
> dead code, ol
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:16 AM, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote:
> Would it be to early to propose that this is just another April Fools joke?
Aww, and just when the discussions were starting to heat up, you had
to go and splash some cold water around. :) I was starting to look
forward to a nice long
on 01/04/2011 08:57 Matthew D. Fuller said the following:
> So, while removing OPTIONS alone may be good, we really need to
> dismantle the system that caused the need for them in the first place
> to avoid creating a greater mess. I think it coud be useful to turn
> to Wikipedia for an example (a
On Thu 31 Mar 2011 at 22:57:44 PDT Matthew D. Fuller wrote:
So, while removing OPTIONS alone may be good, we really need to
dismantle the system that caused the need for them in the first place
to avoid creating a greater mess. I think it coud be useful to turn
to Wikipedia for an example (and
Hi,
I'm disappointed that there are plans to remove the ports framework. I
always considered this to be one of the very strong points of the ports
infra structure, precisely because I believe...
> Not only that but because maintainers would be
> able to choose the best possible configuration fo
2011/4/1 Baptiste Daroussin :
> 2011/4/1 Eitan Adler :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’m been working recently on a series of PRs that called “Reaper
>> of the Dead” PRs. I have been going through the various build files we
>> have (for source, docs, and especially ports) and attempting to remove
>> dead code, o
12 matches
Mail list logo
