Date: Tue, 23 May 2006 04:32:33 -0700 From: "Chris H." <fbsd@1command.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Survey Message-ID: <20060523043233.4ul85wdeeoowocwk@webmail.1command.com> In-Reply-To: <20060522133424.3087acfc@it.buh.tecnik93.com> References: <4471361B.5060208@freebsd.org> <20060521231657.O6063@abigail.angeltread.org> <44714FBB.4000603@samsco.org> <44718700.2060102@kernel32.de> <20060522133424.3087acfc@it.buh.tecnik93.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format and has been PGP signed. --=_4vbp802f6xc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Quoting Ion-Mihai IOnut Tetcu <itetcu@freebsd.org>: > On Mon, 22 May 2006 11:40:16 +0200 > Marian Hettwer <MH@kernel32.de> wrote: > >> > ports tree in the process, the end result is a bit more undefined. One >> > thing that I wish for is that the ports tree would branch for releases, >> > and that those branches would get security updates. I know that this >> > would involve an exponentially larger amount of effort from the ports >> > team, and I don't fault them for not doing it. Still, it would be nice >> > to have. >> >> I have to agree on that statement. I would love to see branched ports. >> This can get very important on servers, were you don't want to have >> major upgrades, but only security updates. >> I guess it's a question of manpower, hm? > > With the maintainers/commiters/physical_resources we have now this is > impossible. > Take a look at pav@'s PR stats page: http://www.oook.cz/bsd/prstats/ > There are ~1000 new ports PRs per month. The PT Team has managed to > close about the same number per month (fewer during the freeze, of > course). > Currently there are 551 open PRs. 238 in feedback state, etc. > >> Would a survey help? As in ask the ports team and FreeBSD >> administrators? Maybe some will start to become port maintainer too, >> just to support the increased work on ports due to branching them... >> I would :) > > There are ~4300 unmaintained ports. Maybe you could start maintaining > some of them _now_ ? This brings up a point I have been wanting to bring up for over a mos.; I adopted an "orphaned" port (contacted the owner, whom then relenquished ownership to me.). But found it _more_ than difficult to discover how to inform the fBSD port(s) system of it's new, *un*orphaned status. I read through the online doc's about it. But got dizzy with the circularness of it. Searching led to no _difinative_ answer(s) either. Is it still send pr just to update it's status? Couldn't there be an online form to change ownership/ stewardship? I *can* comprehend the send pr system. I simply can't understand how to change/ update ownership/ stewardship. Perhaps this is why so many of the orphaned ports remain in this state. --Chris H. > > -- > IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" > "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" > > BOFH excuse #146: > Communications satellite used by the military for star wars > > > -- Shameless self-promotion follows... ... or does it? ----------------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// --=_4vbp802f6xc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: PGP Digital Signature Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBEcvLQXxK1cRs0zxkRAqCLAJ0arqU5XDPLwPCZUjwhAmCtF2eevgCfakOh ZxZx5PzZq+E9Fm0nvg3+++I= =q+CA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_4vbp802f6xc--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060523043233.4ul85wdeeoowocwk>