From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep  8 14:15:34 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B684106566B;
	Thu,  8 Sep 2011 14:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com)
Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net
	[207.172.157.102])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089968FC0A;
	Thu,  8 Sep 2011 14:15:33 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mr16.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.36])
	by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 08 Sep 2011 10:15:33 -0400
Received: from smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net
	[207.172.157.104]) by mr16.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 4.2.3-GA)
	with ESMTP id BHC29066; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:15:31 -0400
X-Auth-ID: anat
Received: from 209-6-61-133.c3-0.sbo-ubr1.sbo.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO
	[192.168.1.8]) ([209.6.61.133])
	by smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 08 Sep 2011 10:15:30 -0400
Message-ID: <4E68CE0D.2050000@aldan.algebra.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:15:41 -0400
From: "Mikhail T." <mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
	rv:5.0) Gecko/20110706 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Greg Byshenk <freebsd@byshenk.net>
References: <201109050933.p859XEbP004874@fire.js.berklix.net>
	<4E64C35A.50004@FreeBSD.org>
	<4e65b42e.M5K+to11vAdk/UTk%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
	<4E6581E2.1060502@FreeBSD.org>
	<4e671817.ddHMkPbq9dJ7tLMz%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
	<4E66EFC5.3020201@FreeBSD.org>
	<4e67a3b2.CVKcpQ8KQzuo8BP+%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
	<4E67F41F.70401@FreeBSD.org> <4E680908.3060708@aldan.algebra.com>
	<20110908084205.GG13219@portland.byshenk.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110908084205.GG13219@portland.byshenk.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5
Cc: ports@freebsd.org, jhs@berklix.com, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>,
	perryh@pluto.rain.com, utisoft@gmail.com
Subject: Re: ports-system priorities rant (Re: sysutils/cfs)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 14:15:34 -0000

On 08.09.2011 04:42, Greg Byshenk wrote:
> For many people, what "THERE IS A PORT OF IT" actually -means- is
> that the user can go to ports and install a -working- version of
> the software, not merley that there is something called 'IT'
> somewhere in the ports tree that may or may not work.

Some ports -- both maintained or disowned -- will always be behind the 
upstream. Some ports will always be better than others. Simply removing 
those, where the perceived quality drops below somebody's subjective 
threshold does not improve quality. Having a poor port of an obscure 
piece of software is better, than no port at all. And, yes, this is the 
core of the disagreement... Yours,

    -mi