Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2000 16:37:40 -0500 From: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net>, Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ports Options Paper Message-ID: <20000909163740.F2089@bonsai.hiwaay.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009090127570.18449-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>; from kris@FreeBSD.ORG on Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:29:53AM -0700 References: <vqc7l8m6p16.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009090127570.18449-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 01:29:53AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
# On 8 Sep 2000, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
#
# > As I said before, this is a solved problem. Please show why MASTERDIR
# > is not appropriate if you want to continue this discussion. ("It is a
# > hackish way" is not a valid reason. :)
#
# Yeah..this is a fair point. Even if you guys don't like the way it
# currently works, it does work and there are better things we should be
# working on - this can always be improved later.
I happen to also subscribe to the one port, one package guideline.
And yes you are right we have much bigger fish to fry. What we
have today works even though it might be suboptimal.
-steve
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000909163740.F2089>