From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Sun May 19 02:29:58 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9206159FE0E; Sun, 19 May 2019 02:29:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [18.222.6.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.soaustin.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 461CC72844; Sun, 19 May 2019 02:29:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from lonesome.com (unknown [18.188.142.31]) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 000DA16E80; Sun, 19 May 2019 02:29:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:29:49 +0000 From: Mark Linimon To: Jan Beich Cc: Adam Weinberger , svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev , Wen Heping , svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r501789 - in head: . lang lang/clips Message-ID: <20190519022948.GA18821@lonesome.com> References: <201905161356.x4GDuH46087910@repo.freebsd.org> <20190518102821.GA62145@FreeBSD.org> <20190518203434.GA1858@lonesome.com> <9B96C374-0946-491B-AA27-27802B9257A7@adamw.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 461CC72844 X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.82 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.82)[-0.819,0] X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:29:58 -0000 If we wrote every single possible "policy" aka rough consensus in the Porter's Handbook it would be a thousand pages long. And nothing but arguing would ever get done. Actually, while on portmgr, for a number of years I attempted to generate such consenses and document them. The results are on: https://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/policies.html et alia. Have you ever read this document? (I know perfectly well that this is a leading question.) Hundreds of hours were spent on the portmgr/ pages -- I know, because I spent them. Hundreds of emails were sent back and forth. Many long arguments on IRC were had. And you know what the net effect of all this was on the users? Zero. Zilch. Nothing. Nada. Rien. The ports that were broken before all this policy was hammered out were still broken. The Makefiles that didn't conform to common style, stayed the same. And on and on. To be really ugly about this, I would like to have every single second of that time back. Because it accomplished ***nothing***. tl:dr; it you demand a perfect consensus and a hard-written set of rules from a group of people -- not just portmgr but *any* group of people anywhere -- you're going to spend a lot of your time being disappointed. mcl p.s. this, and other equivalent arguments, are why I finally quit portmgr.