Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:07:42 +0200 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: RELEASE_X_Y_Z branches/tags maintained?? Message-ID: <200410260007.43234.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <1098686273.666.5.camel@moonlight> References: <1098641975.705.10.camel@moonlight> <20041024223051.GA94197@xor.obsecurity.org> <1098686273.666.5.camel@moonlight>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart7793622.r6bCXG5Pdi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday, 25. October 2004 08:37, Roman Kennke wrote: > What is the problem with such a setup? Lack of interest? Lack of > manpower? Or wrong philosophy? Lack of manpower. I have suggested in the past that a ports-branch for one = or=20 more specific releases could be maintained by a band of=20 individuals/corporations (but outside of the freebsd project) which happen = to=20 need it and I still think it's a good idea. I'm convinced that there must b= e=20 quite a number (professional) users of FreeBSD which already invest man- an= d=20 machinepower into things such as package builders and custom ports=20 modifications - cooperation could lead to greater benefit and some synergy= =20 savings. =2D-=20 ,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org \u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org --nextPart7793622.r6bCXG5Pdi Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.9.11 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBfXkvXhc68WspdLARAjqWAJ4n0dUNoHDLDFM+Lv+bRjM+nyhnhwCeLRUQ q5+5y6AeECDPsQglLUQstDQ= =UBUq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart7793622.r6bCXG5Pdi--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200410260007.43234.michaelnottebrock>