From owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 4 23:02:10 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ruby@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58C5B106566C for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2010 23:02:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com) Received: from mail.sundive.org (mail.sundive.org [212.13.197.214]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9DB8FC12 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2010 23:02:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [87.115.120.168] (helo=[192.168.0.44]) by sundive.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1OgmRb-000OsF-S9 for ruby@freebsd.org; Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:28:17 +0100 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.25.0.100505 Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:20:38 +0100 From: Eric To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: ports-mgmt/portupgrade Thread-Index: Acs0I0QGp+M0V+qLMUqSRofqFtLo6Q== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 87.115.120.168 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on sun.sundive.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on sundive.org) X-bounce-key: sundive.org-1; freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com; 1280963378; 38bdb05c; Cc: Subject: Re: ports-mgmt/portupgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Ruby discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:02:10 -0000 > From: James > Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 15:48:54 -0600 >> >> We alaways hiring, actually. :) >> Any suggestions? >> > I took a look at it for a while with an eye to fixing some of the simpler > issues in it, but I found it really difficult to learn the system: there's a > lot going on in what's a very complicated piece of software, it seems to > me. I think I drew similar conclusions when I last looked at it - a moment of rash inspiration from viewing the all outstanding PRs against ruby@. I do actually use portupgrade (sucessfully) on my own boxes. I don't quite know if it's better to work on portupgrade and iron out the bugs or just support Portmaster as a defacto standard (not that I've ever used it). Perhaps I'll try to find the time to take another glance over the source for portupgrade in the next couple of weeks and try to understand it, although I'm not sure my ports knowledge is quite robust enough! /Eric