Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 15:54:49 +0100 From: Pietro Cerutti <gahr@FreeBSD.org> To: John Marino <marino@freebsd.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, owner-ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r407270 - head/ports-mgmt/portmaster Message-ID: <8b37e4951fc45b4f1eeaf5eb67f76804@gahr.ch> In-Reply-To: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org> References: <201601261123.u0QBNcvL091258@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2016-01-26 12:23, John Marino wrote: > Author: marino > Date: Tue Jan 26 11:23:38 2016 > New Revision: 407270 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/407270 > > Log: > ports-mgmt/portmaster: DEPRECATE without expiration date > [snip] > Moreover, there are better options available. All FreeBSD platforms > support ports-mgmt/poudriere (although some many struggle under the > load) > and the most common amd64 and i386 platform users have the additional > option of ports-mgmt/synth which is user-friendly, lightweight, and > aimed > at users of portmaster, portupgrade, and even poudriere. I see ports-mgmt/synth is under heavy development, good. I have seen a fairly large number of commits to that port lately, and from what I've read in the commit messages, compatibility is not really taken care of at this point. I seem to remember one commit where one option changed meaning, another fixing a corruption issue, etc.. This is *all good*, really, it's an indication that the project is progressing. But would you honestly advise people to use it in production? portmaster had its limitations, but I always found it to be reliable. At least, it wouldn't change the meaning of options under my nose from one commit to the next one. -- Pietro Cerutti gahr@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8b37e4951fc45b4f1eeaf5eb67f76804>