Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 05:16:05 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>, Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/libX11 Makefile distinfo manpages pkg-plist ports/x11/libX11/files patch-src_ImUtil.c Message-ID: <20070607091605.GB22049@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070607102229.98t8ak5kmoo8woco@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <200706061625.l56GP3lo043614@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070606200421.GA5453@rot13.obsecurity.org> <1181165084.76200.1.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <20070606214112.GB6716@rot13.obsecurity.org> <1181173452.30365.20.camel@vonnegut> <20070607014450.GA17218@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20070607015538.GB23820@soaustin.net> <20070607102229.98t8ak5kmoo8woco@webmail.leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 10:22:29AM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> (from Wed, 6 Jun 2007 > 20:55:38 -0500): > > >On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:44:50PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >>The FreeBSD project does not have the resources (or desire) to effectively > >>do full-time incremental X.org release engineering because of X.org > >>changes being continuously pushed into ports. > > Who decides what is going in and what not? What changes are allowed to > go in and which aren't (read: what's the definition of "important" > here)? "Fixes an application crash" or "Fixes a security vulnerability" would be good reasons. "Fixes some manpage typos" or "Adds a new cursor theme" or "Adds some linux-specific cruft" would not be :-) I don't want to have to be the guardian of this myself so I hope the x11@ mailing list will self-regulate with a bit of guidance. Basically everyone needs to be aware that commits to x.org core ports (those in the dependency path of xorg-libraries, basically) need to come with a clear justification of why the update is required, so if you are prepared to defend yourself with solid arguments on that point then you probably have a reason to proceed. > >The last I checked, i386 package builds take ~5 days, amd64 take ~7 days, > >sparc64 take more than 3 weeks. If we push point releases any faster than > >these dates, we will never have current packages. I think this would be > >a serious mistake. > > 4 weeks would be still too fast for changes to X11 ports, I assume. That kind of timescale should be manageable. > >I've spent a lot of time looking at why packages are so far behind the > >ports and the deep dependency trees are the major part of the problem. > > So switching to recording explicit dependencies only would give a > speed improvement in this case (why shall we rebuild an application > which depends on some gnome libs but doesn't make some X11 API calls > directly, the package will not change significantly)? Sometimes a port doesn't care when a dependency changes, sometimes it does - how do you tell those two cases apart with 100% accuracy? I don't think you can. Kris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070607091605.GB22049>