Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 17:27:34 +0000 From: Grzegorz Junka <list1@gjunka.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is pkg quarterly really needed? Message-ID: <55cb6af9-cede-3e98-0df7-11ee97fc132e@gjunka.com> In-Reply-To: <20170421025111.GL74780@home.opsec.eu> References: <ljhffcphq3bqr8dk2lrlld11ola28b7gqp@4ax.com> <29e44642-e301-f07c-afe3-bad735d8ee5e@freebsd.org> <20170420053722.GD31559@lonesome.com> <b9d24938-5502-cc69-30ed-1941c2517849@gjunka.com> <20170420084452.GH74780@home.opsec.eu> <99a57878-ae39-d2a4-fe35-023dae8b320b@gjunka.com> <20170420171119.GJ74780@home.opsec.eu> <127a5f89-93ba-aee4-14d3-41e2f2d71892@gjunka.com> <20170420195712.GK74780@home.opsec.eu> <399feac5-71d7-25ab-80da-84bd6c2eeeda@gjunka.com> <20170421025111.GL74780@home.opsec.eu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21/04/2017 02:51, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > >> If the whole repository builds doesn't it mean by default that any >> subset also builds? > If we defined a repo build only as valid if everything builds, > the whole repo is never valid, because approx. 10% of > the ports tree breaks at any given time. More, if you add options. That's an interesting observation, I didn't know that. Does it mean that the quarterly port tree is no better or worse than the main branch? And is any tree ever build with non-default options? If no, how do you know how many are failing in that case? >> My assumption was that only version >> upgrades are progressed from CURRENT to STABLE to RELEASE. > Leads to a stagnating tree downstream, if you find maintainers for it. > That's the model Debian is using, and it has other issues. Especially > the load for the maintainers is huge, and users are unhappy > that the packages are getting old. Debian has approx. 6 times > more committers than we have, when I last looked, and more maintainers. > > If we take from that that we have to grow our committer base, yes. > Can we reason that unless we have that base, we can't follow that > model ? Maybe. Well, they can't be as unhappy as, say, Centos, where packages are really old. Also, I bet not all users are unhappy when the ports are not updated quickly. Corporate users tend to prefer stable versions even if they are getting a bit old, enthusiasts tend to prefer newest versions. FreeBSD can't cater for both groups a the same time. Which group has been chosen, if it has been chosen? Are we defaulting to enthusiasts? Grzegorz
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55cb6af9-cede-3e98-0df7-11ee97fc132e>