Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:09:37 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 279935] science/mmg: Improve port Message-ID: <bug-279935-7788-HdNUxaByic@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-279935-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-279935-7788@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D279935 --- Comment #6 from Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org> --- Thierry,=20 I fail to see how anyone could consider a request for improvement as "being harrassed". I do not see any personal texts here. What I would however very much like to see is that ports that offer "make t= est" pass the test on the mainstream OS and ARCH - so we know when stuff breaks = at "build-time" and not at run-time, which I see as improving the overall user experience. And I am not sure that I like too much if someone adds a new p= ort that isn't ready without it being marked experimental or anything.=20=20 What's your urge? June 30 approaching for 2024Q3? Then quality is also urgent... I appreciate that different people in a large project may have different standards or let's rather say priorities as to when to consider something "done", but then also you seem to be frustrated with other ports - what does this have to do with a newly added mmg port? Re-enabling tests later once= you had had added those tests is a matter of usually one Makefile line, so that cannot be the actual reason. (Thierry may not see a copy from BZ directly any more, I will make sure he = sees my comment.) --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-279935-7788-HdNUxaByic>