From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 9 01:45:41 2011 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 76553106566B for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 01:45:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from code@apotheon.net) Received: from oproxy9.bluehost.com (oproxy9.bluehost.com [69.89.24.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 40F3D8FC19 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2011 01:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 29108 invoked by uid 0); 9 Sep 2011 01:45:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box543.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.143) by oproxy9.bluehost.com with SMTP; 9 Sep 2011 01:45:19 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apotheon.net; s=default; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=VO5Ym6fYilmgXYrpObl2fkpKyNebH2Sk8kVPXGaLspk=; b=hpto3x3ezy/V785LKsl47mSGHEF1T2+G1Y6F0CvEEEW/u2ddPRa/QiOvVCNkUypmi0m1QP3iFQLy3Cp93mcWxqWdOTAJMwVMGScG7inwSDC5XKL3b6/Xfz2D/CY39BFd; Received: from c-24-8-180-234.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.8.180.234] helo=kukaburra.hydra) by box543.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1R1ppQ-0005k7-SD for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 19:24:25 -0600 Received: by kukaburra.hydra (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 08 Sep 2011 19:05:34 -0600 Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 19:05:34 -0600 From: Chad Perrin To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20110909010534.GA15143@guilt.hydra> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org References: <4E68EF1E.9090803@FreeBSD.org> <201109090101.p891190r079196@fire.js.berklix.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="17pEHd4RhPHOinZp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201109090101.p891190r079196@fire.js.berklix.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Identified-User: {2737:box543.bluehost.com:apotheon:apotheon.org} {sentby:smtp auth 24.8.180.234 authed with ren@apotheon.org} 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 01:45:41 -0000 --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 03:01:09AM +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Matthias Andree wrote: > > Am 08.09.2011 16:15, schrieb Mikhail T.: > >=20 > > > Having a poor port of an obscure > > > piece of software is better, than no port at all.=20 > >=20 > > A poor port is undesirable (and shouldn't be in the tree in the first > > place). >=20 > Wrong. > A `poor' port is is still a port else it would be marked Broken. Still > a lot less work to polish than writing a port from scratch. Still a > damn sight more use to non programmers than no port. Maybe it might > just need a bit more work to speify more depends, but still be working > anyway. It occurs to me there are people who would call KDE4 a "poor" port. I suspect deleting that would not go over well. --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk5pZl4ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKVpgQCgjspa+3mMzDI1ZYRjUsw/b+v/ 4/gAnjHRsC+8xZeW4yaw47RojJ4JUB68 =uWWF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --17pEHd4RhPHOinZp--