From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 12 07:48:13 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3F871065671 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:48:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) Received: from dns1.vizion2000.net (77-99-36-42.cable.ubr04.chap.blueyonder.co.uk [77.99.36.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9146A8FC0C for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:48:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) Received: from dns1.vizion2000.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dns1.vizion2000.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 312AA1CC89 for ; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:09:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by dns1.vizion2000.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id m6C89l7U071000 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:09:47 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) X-Authentication-Warning: dns1.vizion2000.net: david set sender to david@vizion2000.net using -f From: David Southwell Organization: Voice and Vision To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 01:09:46 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <200807100340.38399.david@vizion2000.net> <200807111449.55648.david@vizion2000.net> <4877D0E3.4000303@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4877D0E3.4000303@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807120109.46968.david@vizion2000.net> Subject: Re: portupgrade to Perl 5.10.0 ?? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:48:14 -0000 On Friday 11 July 2008 14:30:11 Remko Lodder wrote: > David Southwell wrote: > > On Friday 11 July 2008 14:02:09 Remko Lodder wrote: > >> David Southwell wrote: > >>> On Friday 11 July 2008 11:53:50 you wrote: > >>>> David Southwell wrote: > >>>>> If we had to argue for every port on these terms everyone would spend > >>>>> their time arguing and we would have none atall. > >>>>> > >>>>> It is not as though Perl is an obscure bit of buggy code that none > >>>>> uses. > >>>>> > >>>>> If there is a request then simply a response to your last question is > >>>>> needed. > >>>>> > >>>>> Enough > >>>>> > >>>>> david. > >>>> > >>>> So, when can I expect your updated work on the port, build all > >>>> dependencies to make sure they keep on working etc? I understand that > >>>> we want to have this as soon as possible, but also do keep in mind > >>>> that we would like to make sure as much as possible that the code can > >>>> actually work. I am not aware of the reason for this taking longer > >>>> then some of you expect. But I am sure that there is a reason. It all > >>>> remains volunteer work and people might choose to do different things > >>>> then satisfy your specific need. Not that I am saying we shouldnt do > >>>> it, but I am stating that there is more then just your wish. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> remko > >>> > >>> This started because I asked a simple question. Is there a possibility > >>> of getting perl 5.10.0 and when. I did not expect the third degree > >>> > >>> > >>> Admittedly I am curious why it is taking six months when most ports do > >>> not take that long - but curiosity does not imply personal antagonism, > >>> criticsm or sarcasm. > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> david > >> > >> It also doesn't imply that you can "demand" that people import 5.10.0 > >> because you want it, need it or whatever. It does mean that probably > >> work is underway but that it stalled or something for a reason. > >> > >> "thanks" > >> remko > > > > I have hear no demand from anyone only reasonable curiosity following > > six months delay. It is: > > 1. reasonable to ask when > > 2. Courteous to give a reply. > > > > David > > > > David > > And I told that you are entitled to do so, but your 'between the lines' > stated more then just a question, which I ofcourse can understand. > > You have had your reply: I think work is underway, we do not know when > it's available, but it will be as soon as possible. > > Thanks, > remko Are there particular obstacles that have caused the delay? David