Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:01:44 GMT From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@FreeBSD.org> To: gerald@FreeBSD.org, gerald@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/86512: [new port] lang/gcc401 Message-ID: <200511232301.jANN1iUC025328@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Synopsis: [new port] lang/gcc401 Responsible-Changed-From-To: gerald->ports Responsible-Changed-By: gerald Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Nov 23 22:27:11 GMT 2005 Responsible-Changed-Why: Sorry for the delay, had been gone for some time. I don't want to veto/reject this, but I won't be the one to maintain such ports, so I'm returning this to ports@. My personal opinion is that this is not worthwhile, because release branches are supposed to be stable, and generally are. If there was any perceived unstability earlier this year, that was due to me cleaning up the ports, and due to problems with Java support. In fact, one can consider it harmfull to some extent, since by tracking a release branch, in the rare case there is a problem, we can have it fixes rather sooner than latter, before the next release. Also, GCC x.y.z is not necessarily strictly better than GCC x.y.z+1 in all regards, even though that's the goal, so by that reasoning we'd have to have a gcc401, a gcc402, a gcc403 and so forth port. (If there were problems with 4.0, keep in mind that this was rather large a version jump. Nobody usually would use 4.0.0 for production, would he?) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=86512
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200511232301.jANN1iUC025328>