I have strong opinions against this, at least for ports with an active
maintainer. I really see these deprecation campaigns as treading on
somebody's toes.
I really like linimon's periodic emails FreeBSD ports that you maintain
which are currently marked broken, which I see as a reminder that
I have strong opinions against this, at least for ports with an active
maintainer. I really see these deprecation campaigns as treading on
somebody's toes.
I really like linimon's periodic emails FreeBSD ports that you maintain
which are currently marked broken, which I see as a reminder
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Frederic Culot wrote:
To conciliate such a necessary action without hurting the feelings of those
maintainers who despite their work could not update the state of their port
in a
timely manner, maybe it would be good to be more verbose in the log of
On 2012-Apr-10, 06:56, Mark Linimon wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Frederic Culot wrote:
To conciliate such a necessary action without hurting the feelings of those
maintainers who despite their work could not update the state of their port
in a
timely manner, maybe it
2012/4/10 Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Frederic Culot wrote:
To conciliate such a necessary action without hurting the feelings of
those
maintainers who despite their work could not update the state of their
port in a
timely manner, maybe it
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 02:21:42PM +0200, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
The maintainer might be waiting for something to happen either upstream
or in our infrastructure, which could release the port from brokenness.
Putting a comment about that in the Makefile might go a long way to
minimizing
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 09:32:47AM -0300, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
There is nothing more frustrating than try to install a port and it
doesn't fetch or doesn't build.
That's been my main point of worry all along (more personally than as
portmgr), and why I think the deprecation campaigns do more
On 2012-Apr-10, 09:32, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 01:45:38PM +0200, Frederic Culot wrote:
To conciliate such a necessary action without hurting the feelings of
those
maintainers who despite their work could not update the
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:40:09 -0500
Mark Linimon articulated:
Finally, I agree that FreeBSD can't guarantee any given ports will
work, but I think we owe the users the effort to make sure if a port
is included, it's at least not completely useless.
To guarantee that the port will work is
On 4/10/2012 14:44, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In theory, it tickles administrators to look for alternatives if they
depend on the port or fork a working copy of the port in their local
infrastructure and
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of view, no make sense have a bunch of ports that actually
doesn't works or because there is a fetch problem or even it is set as
BROKEN. Who
On 2012-Apr-10, 11:20, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of view, no make sense have a bunch of ports that actually
doesn't works or because there
On 2012-Apr-10, 09:04, Jerry wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:40:09 -0500
Mark Linimon articulated:
Finally, I agree that FreeBSD can't guarantee any given ports will
work, but I think we owe the users the effort to make sure if a port
is included, it's at least not completely useless.
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
On 2012-Apr-10, 11:20, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a
BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of view, no make sense have a bunch of
On 4/10/2012 16:47, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
On 2012-Apr-10, 11:20, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of view, no make sense have a bunch of ports that
On 10 April 2012 14:56, Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org wrote:
On 2012-Apr-10, 09:04, Jerry wrote:
On Tue, 10 Apr 2012 07:40:09 -0500
Mark Linimon articulated:
Finally, I agree that FreeBSD can't guarantee any given ports will
work, but I think we owe the users the effort to make sure if a
On 2012-Apr-10, 17:17, Mel Flynn wrote:
On 4/10/2012 16:47, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
On 2012-Apr-10, 11:20, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 04:47:41PM +0200, Pietro Cerutti wrote:
On 2012-Apr-10, 11:20, Marcelo Araujo wrote:
2012/4/10 Pietro Cerutti g...@freebsd.org
I might agree on that. But how is a DEPRECATED port better than a BROKEN
one in this regard?
In my point of view, no make
18 matches
Mail list logo
