From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Nov 12 11:56:20 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E560C37B436
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:56:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from energyhq.homeip.net (213-97-200-73.uc.nombres.ttd.es [213.97.200.73])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A88D643E4A
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 11:56:17 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from flynn@energyhq.homeip.net)
Received: from christine.energyhq.tk (christine.energyhq.tk [192.168.0.1])
	by energyhq.homeip.net (Postfix) with SMTP id C043FAF58C
	for <ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2002 20:56:07 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 21:00:27 +0100
From: Miguel Mendez <flynn@energyhq.homeip.net>
To: ports@freebsd.org
Subject: About the recent PORTCOMMENT issue.
Message-Id: <20021112210027.2e8c4e5a.flynn@energyhq.homeip.net>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386--netbsdelf)
X-Face: 1j}k*2<FF@J5*`)_?pCn}ydC/PB|6|Y;HZ!6Z!%^'/H*.8V=9YjDc*mn6ypI'16$yA\IP}. j3e/`G#5U"1^bwTR6D1H*wPZm}8(ONGrl85Hx!;V^f#`]Xe]35]75HJ%3\J\<j4@V;3kd`C(L_6PA_ sS\5f/c]-:)IF{uj[,!sdoNC?%ne5^:XGp9AG1(?gep3f}#;>E>Y\+C~E|/wehi[:dCM,{N7/uE3o# P,{t7gA/qnovFDDuyQV.1hdT7&#d)q"xY33}{_GS>kk'S{O]nE$A`T|\4&p\&mQyexOLb8}FO<qX<, @*v.fy*'PvzDPQK9iUGzU\
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-ports.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-ports>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-ports>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Hi,

I've been following the thread on the PORTCOMMENT thing, and would like
to tell my humble thoughts on the issue. My idea simply is, if you want
PORTCOMMENT + other enhancements, why not simply adopt NetBSD's pkgsrc?
It was originally derived from FreeBSD's port system, but has evolved on
its own, and, IMHO, it's currently superior. What are people's views on
this? Granted, NetBSD's number of packages is well bellow FreeBSD's one,
but I think it would be beneficial for both to adopt a common (or at
least very similar) ports scheme.

Cheers,
-- 
        Miguel Mendez - flynn@energyhq.homeip.net
        GPG Public Key :: http://energyhq.homeip.net/files/pubkey.txt
        EnergyHQ :: http://www.energyhq.tk
        In BSD we trust

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message