From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Dec 11 22:38:37 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19BF0C72455 for ; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 22:38:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) Received: from nm14-vm9.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm14-vm9.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.252]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E309E1720 for ; Sun, 11 Dec 2016 22:38:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scratch65535@att.net) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1481495754; bh=X1P63P6gFtjXj3ry6qhixSJaEwnmPcTzIKwSYVvnx7U=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=4oK4cuH8QjRHejpASRzIO/jVehlEFtqTuhEooml+HQDRMl/a3//43aNrbBBETbpuOAWhCZu3wTaY2jsVldeHcttcqSNPjp2EI+QSXPrP3UXRd8gah1z1+WtWsw4qZp21HyMNMef3w2672Flcqea+dCvfaXCngs3SGluOCXwhNFM= Received: from [216.39.60.169] by nm14.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2016 22:35:54 -0000 Received: from [67.195.23.147] by tm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2016 22:35:54 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp119.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 11 Dec 2016 22:35:54 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 444889.14680.bm@smtp119.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: 4t8bqU4VM1mIksynz6eUNrIc.qBRxXxbufRuRluRRChYGbo 1ewBmg49iwZzduW3PtP2REKq1RBEdm3ahPDrLBZ5SFB.aS.90Gm5lUIxPbiK PclUW0mYI_30yBu1z2QJv8h2DlSjhzqRLAZhmDmCZXV.ArvLjc6CdMxXhgTT fCXU.CZuTPrv1PVF2I63ysJzlzFVsAXT0GxRbFD2JmboReuBp19f1fzMYM5c r4Lkg_uRs.GDmJHuBlE7xbJDiuXT7gU9guIDWC4aS6w.49d7czjfcOw9HpnA aaUakepvpdCF.rtHy9zUNsdJmiVZTD4U9tPKfvBBiV24kENcOtbPujbVM.Rb JgP0GmSLHhgzsizBZyPFm7s3urBtfdc1EW4vmyUck4uzc.dZwSW_ZqmokCAX TjbzR74aIOHvQeSim7W.3Ut7PuFzYjUpN738ohROvxXaXiDHKDaaFWHI.lrS Ll5rmdraL4zpvdfv5gqqkgnyOl7gosPNwar81qg_Dk_My3ii0cfL.bPd1pol vcNl.pcVrmrfNGE4ttPerdEERkYQMM966vc7dmpTKI36j9siDwutH53w- X-Yahoo-SMTP: pPvqnOaswBBbYZLVYFzvU7GaowLcbNioPp.aF8KvOjZk From: To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The ports collection has some serious issues Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 17:35:54 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20161208085926.GC2691@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20161208085926.GC2691@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 22:38:37 -0000 I have to admit that I avoid ports if at all possible because I've hardly ever been able to do a build that ran to completion. There's always some piece of code that's missing and can't be found, or is the wrong version, et lengthy cetera. I've never done release engineering, but I honestly can't imagine how some of the stuff that makes its way into the ports tree ever got past QA. It would get someone sacked if it happened in industry. If the dev schedule would SLOW DOWN and the commitment switched to quality from the current emphasis on frequency, with separate trees for alpha-, beta-, and real release-quality, fully-vetted code, the ports system might become usable again.