From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Nov 24 4:17:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from merkur.hrz.uni-giessen.de (merkur.hrz.uni-giessen.de [134.176.2.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4D6A14EEF for ; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 04:17:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ariel.Burbaickij@mni.fh-giessen.de) Received: from caspar.mni.fh-giessen.de by merkur.hrz.uni-giessen.de with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:17:05 +0100 Received: from sun33.mni.fh-giessen.de ([134.176.183.133]) by caspar.mni.fh-giessen.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #6) id 11qbCI-00017F-00; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:06:54 +0100 Received: from localhost (hg9456@localhost) by sun33.mni.fh-giessen.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA26917; Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:16:53 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: sun33.mni.fh-giessen.de: hg9456 owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 13:16:51 +0100 (MET) From: Ariel Burbaickij X-Sender: hg9456@sun33 To: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Cc: Ariel Burbaickij , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: two branches in Gnome and fbsd response to it In-Reply-To: <19991124131046.C68066@lucifer.bart.nl> Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 24 Nov 1999, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote: > -On [19991124 13:05], Ariel Burbaickij (Ariel.Burbaickij@mni.fh-giessen.de) wrote: > > Is it really so decentralized thatthe ONLY person > > who make the decission is just maintainer of the port. > > Basically and in theory, yes. > > In practice, no. The user community is the community which supplies the > ports. So the user community is also the community which can get it to > go otherwise. But in the case of ports, there's an entire mailinglist > devoted to it along with people who basically co-ordinate the whole > effort. Some people whom come to mind: Chris Piazza, Satoshi Asami, > Steve Price, Jim Mock and some other long time contributors. > > > What is so wrong then with idea to have two branches of ports > > one stable and one current?There are people who want stable > > there people are who want current and there people who want > > stable in one part and current or beta in other > > ports in cvs is only current, but that does not imply the ports > shouldn't be stable. Hence I said to take it up with the maintainer and > the ports list to let your dissatisfaction be known, but don't just be a > messenger, be a part of the solution. That's what I have been trying to > say. Or well got it I somehow thought YOU are the maintainer of gnome-related part of ports.Well surely I will take up contact then. > I never had problems with ports being beta or current or how you call > it. They were always stable for use in our production I do.The outpuit of xchat-1.3.7 vanishes after I had used programm 3 or 4 times. Regards Ariel > > Kind regards, > > -- > Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Network- and systemadministrator > bART Internet Services / > Tel: +31 - (0) 10 - 240 39 70 VIA NET.WORKS Netherlands > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message