Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 12 Aug 2014 21:44:59 +0200
From:      John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st>
To:        Cy Schubert <cy@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org,  svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r364739 - in head: . sysutils sysutils/syslog-ng-devel sysutils/syslog-ng-devel/files
Message-ID:  <53EA6EBB.2010802@marino.st>
In-Reply-To: <53ea6d76.6eb9.5599e7c9@svn.freebsd.org>
References:  <53ea6d76.6eb9.5599e7c9@svn.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/12/2014 21:39, Cy Schubert wrote:
> Author: cy
> Date: Tue Aug 12 19:39:33 2014
> New Revision: 364739
> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/364739
> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r364739/
> 
> Log:
>   Reintroduce syslog-ng-devel for 3.6.0alpha2.
>   
>   Submitted by:	Peter Czanik <peter.czanik@balabit.com> (syslog-ng upline)


Do Ports really need alpha quality -devel ports in the collection?

If it were up to me I'd purge 90% of our -devel ports.  I tried to start
a conversation about a policy for these with portmgr, but as usual, only
one person responded.  I'd still like to have that conversation though.
 This -devel port trend is disturbing.

John



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53EA6EBB.2010802>