Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:37:04 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Lapo Luchini <lapo@lapo.it> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org>, Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org>, Andrew Pantyukhin <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org>, Martin Wilke <miwi@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: XPI infrastructure needs some love Message-ID: <4C868650.7090504@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4C866AB3.4030802@lapo.it> References: <4C866AB3.4030802@lapo.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/07/2010 09:39 AM, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Dear port committers, > I understand that infofarmer@ and miwi@ have no more enough free > time to be hyper-active about those and other ports (and btw, thanks > very much for the huge work you did in the past!), but is out there > anyone else out there with both a commit bit and some time on hand to > give a bit of love to the XPI ports? This might be a good time to re-evaluate how we handle those ports in the first place. How many of them involve actual C or C++ code that needs to be compiled to run, vs. simply re-packaging javascript bits? (That's a serious question btw, not a troll.) For those that we are simply repackaging, what's the value in doing that, vs. simply allowing users to download them from mozilla's site? I use quite a few addons for both firefox and thunderbird and the only FreeBSD version I use is enigmail, which (AFAIK) actually does require compilation. Everything else I download, and have never had a problem. Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C868650.7090504>