From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Aug 3 13:40:41 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id NAA15783 for ports-outgoing; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usc.usc.unal.edu.co ([200.21.26.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA15762; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:40:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unalmodem11.usc.unal.edu.co by usc.usc.unal.edu.co (AIX 4.1/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA03016; Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:34:13 -0400 Message-Id: <33E50792.6E94@fps.biblos.unal.edu.co> Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 15:34:58 -0700 From: "Pedro Giffuni S," Organization: Universidad Nacional de Colombia X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold [it] (Win16; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Andreas Klemm , phk@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, Satoshi Asami Subject: Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) References: <3326.870638153@time.cdrom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > ... > there for. It's a testing ground, not a place for hosting the ports > collection. > It seems to me like Satoshi was right, then: ports ARE for stable users, not for current users. Current users are responsible for what they break, but the dilemma will always be who is gonna take care of re-porting the applications when the time for 3.0-Release comes. > Perhaps we've lost sight of what the ports collection is there for > also. I always envisioned it as that "extra 10%", like comfortable > seats in your car or airbags in your dashboard. It makes the system You must recognize this utilities make the system desirable. The OS can get as sofisticated as you want, but if applications don't work, no one will be interested in running it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't understand what is so mission-critical in Tcl as to decide to break the ports tree. Pedro. > > Jordan