Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:36:34 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ability for maintainers to update own ports Message-ID: <20031111223634.GA29397@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <2E850FE8-1494-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com> References: <1068471598.38101.77.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110163623.GC93583@procyon.firepipe.net> <1068495958.690.72.camel@leguin> <53EC784E-13C5-11D8-AD24-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <3FB00E53.8060603@fillmore-labs.com> <20031111021929.GA17050@xor.obsecurity.org> <73E9F604-1472-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <20031111183540.GA26599@xor.obsecurity.org> <3FB13AA5.7090209@fillmore-labs.com> <2E850FE8-1494-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 05:12:47PM -0500, Charles Swiger wrote: > If someone could do a "cvs checkout -r RELENG_4_5" against the ports=20 > CVS repo, and update to the latest version of each port which is known=20 > to build on their version of the OS, that user would obtain=20 > significantly more benefit than being told that they need to upgrade=20 > their OS in order to use newer port versions. I think you're missing the point. No-one disagrees that it would be wonderful if users of old releases could continue to use up-to-date software. The problem is that making that work requires a *lot* of effort, and there just isn't any to spare from the ranks of the people who are currently doing the bulk of the work to keep the Ports Collection useful and relevant, given that it's already a continual uphill struggle to keep up with the growth of the ports collection and the demands placed on it by freebsd (support for new architectures, new releases - soon we'll have 3 branches to support, etc). You just can't ignore this by pointing out that the goal is worthwhile: any major change that puts a significant extra burden on existing contributors is essentially a non-starter. If you think the Ports Collection should maintain certain higher standards with respect to supporting old releases, you personally are going to have to put in the effort to ensure that it comes to pass. That means keeping a testbed of systems for testing whatever combinations of OS and software you want to support, and putting in the effort on a long-term basis to support this. If you can show that you (and any other interested parties) are going to stick with this for a reasonable term, then we can talk about what we (FreeBSD) can do to support your efforts. Kris --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/sWRyWry0BWjoQKURAgZJAJ0a3+XrBlxO0/0H6ybXdHfV8Z3IuACeMMTD sXNOx6RKwbDKcx4pTb8WBJs= =P63D -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9jxsPFA5p3P2qPhR--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031111223634.GA29397>