Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 19:06:59 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Call for feedback on a Ports-collection change Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401081859100.26372-100000@pancho> In-Reply-To: <p0602041abc1660a416d0@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Well, I'd have to say that, despite the merits of the idea, there are many more pressing problems facing the ports collection than filesize. My order would be something more like: 1. Fix the remaining ports, if any, that do not deal with the threads metadefinitions, because KSE is scheduled to become the default in 3-4 weeks. 2. Fix the remaining gcc3.3-inflicted problems before 5.3 becomes the new -stable branch, which is 3-4 months. 3. Remove broken ports which stand no chance of working on 5.3, in that same timeframe. 4. Try to assess the impact of the new guidelines for timeouts, in that same timeframe. 5. Try to get the 74 PRs currently in the "portmgr" queue integrated into bsd.*.mk and extensively QAed. 6. Try to attack the extensive 'unfetchable distfiles'. Those are my own priorities. Other people's mileage may, and probably will, vary considerably. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0401081859100.26372-100000>