From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Thu Apr 20 05:37:25 2017 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 2BBDED47CCF for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18EB06E6 for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 184EFD47CCE; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: 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 17F3AD47CCD for ; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [192.108.105.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.soaustin.net", Issuer "StartCom Class 2 IV Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F40026E5; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from lonesome.com (bones.soaustin.net [192.108.105.22]) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE7E56A1; Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:37:23 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:37:22 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: Julian Elischer Cc: scratch65535@att.net, krad , freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Is pkg quarterly really needed? Message-ID: <20170420053722.GD31559@lonesome.com> References: <58F61A8D.1030309@a1poweruser.com> <29e44642-e301-f07c-afe3-bad735d8ee5e@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <29e44642-e301-f07c-afe3-bad735d8ee5e@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) 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: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 05:37:25 -0000 I understand that having the quarterlies is not meeting your use case. You've said that. We get it. So you want some kind of running -quarterly branch. But where are the N hours of work per week to QA all the patches to the -quarterly branch, or a -stable branch, or whatever people seem to demand, to come from? This is a serious -- if very irritated -- request. We've moved from a "we don't have enough person-power to manage a ports branch" to "we kinda have enough person-power to manage both head and a kinda-branch." OK. That isn't meeting all the use cases. Understood. Are you going to volunteer for a team to run that QA? Who else do you think should be on it? Clearly the current volunteers don't have the bandwidth. It is hard enough just to kep ports-head building. Where do the hours come from? You're comparing your expectations of the output of what a professional QA team would do, to the work that N volunteers do. Obviously the results are not comparable. It's crazy to think that they would be. Honestly without some volunteers to do the _hard_, _unrewarding_, work to QA the ports tree, this is all either a) just talk, or b) people wanting volunteers to provide professional-level support, for free. tl;dr: provide some resources, or don't. I am getting to the point where I don't care either way. All I see is the people who are doing actual work get poked in the eye. mcl