From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 14 18:47:42 2004 Return-Path: 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 D97F516A4CE for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:47:42 +0000 (GMT) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu (c-213-160-32-54.customer.ggaweb.ch [213.160.32.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 308BA43D31 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:47:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from benlutz@datacomm.ch) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C081E9 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:47:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from maxlor.mine.nu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (midgard [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51698-04 for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:47:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from merlin.intranet (merlin.intranet [10.0.0.16]) by maxlor.mine.nu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DAFCF for ; Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:47:40 +0100 (CET) From: Benjamin Lutz To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:47:36 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20041113101925.GB70256@voodoo.oberon.net> In-Reply-To: <20041113101925.GB70256@voodoo.oberon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1985503.u7cWbsJ02b"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200411141947.39918.benlutz@datacomm.ch> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at maxlor.mine.nu Subject: Re: HEADSUP: INDEX[-5] files were removed from CVS. X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:47:43 -0000 --nextPart1985503.u7cWbsJ02b Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline This change is most annoying. I'm not questioning the decision, I'm sure=20 that a lot of people who know the ports system much better than I do have=20 discussed it in-depth, but I would like to state that this change was=20 done in an ungraceful and disruptive manner. I noticed that something was different when my portupgrade suddenly took=20 ages. There being *nothing* about this in UPGRADING didn't exactly help=20 either. Next time, can't you please give an advance warning (a HEADSUP=20 mail to the mailing lists is enough, but please do it a few days before=20 you change things). Also, an UPGRADING entry is a must. And if would have=20 been extra considerate if you had waited with this change until that new=20 index generator tool was in the ports. Some of the machines I admin are=20 very weak, and make index is just not practical. Granted, make fetchindex=20 works, but how is that an improvement over having the INDEX in CVS. As for an always out of date INDEX - I'd rather have an INDEX file that I=20 know only gets updated every few weeks, but which works and which I don't=20 have to worry about. Well, I guess giving people some incentive to think about how to improve=20 the ports system is a good thing. Would have been nice though if that=20 incentive had been a carrot instead of a pitch fork though. Benjamin --nextPart1985503.u7cWbsJ02b Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBl6hLgShs4qbRdeQRAuWdAJ9HhzsNNftSMc+XmgODXqJunMn7mQCfZ18m lXstxw/gbrKzkNrbHt2W6qQ= =uXTB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1985503.u7cWbsJ02b--