From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 17 21:38:46 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC9C106564A for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:38:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonathan@kc8onw.net) Received: from vps.kc8onw.net (jonathanstewart-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:71d::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F8D8FC0A for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:38:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jonathan@kc8onw.net) Received: from [10.70.3.2] (unknown [65.165.236.87]) by vps.kc8onw.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABE301703C for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:38:45 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4921E47E.7000001@kc8onw.net> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:39:10 -0500 From: Jonathan User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Updating multimedia/handbrake X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 21:38:46 -0000 I have some general questions/issues about updating and maintaining the multimedia/handbrake port. 1) The handbrake build system unmodified uses wget to download all it's dependencies itself. The patches to modify the build system to not do this are fairly significant and are a maintenance headache. Would allowing the port to download it's dependencies itself be acceptable or do I need to continue using the ports distfile system and maintaining awkward patches? 2) In addition to the above the developers have stated they would strongly prefer that we not download the dependencies directly from them as the server is not load balanced. In this case do we fetch them directly anyway, host them on FreeBSD controlled systems, or something else altogether? 3) The Handbrake developers prefer to directly distribute binaries rather than have people building handbrake themselves but this goes again the ports philosophy where building from source is the primary method and packages are a convenience. Should I make the port a stub that installs a pre-compiled binary like the teamspeak port does? As I write this email it seems 3 may be the most acceptable solution for both sides. Anyone see any significant downsides to this other than the need to possibly have separate packages for 6 and 7? Thank you for your time, Jonathan Stewart