Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 21:38:36 +0100 From: Michael Gmelin <grembo@freebsd.org> To: Alphons van Werven <freebsd@skysmurf.nl> Cc: tingox@gmail.com, John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: The ports collection has some serious issues Message-ID: <2E32E0E1-C44F-497B-9852-6E2A6E331FD8@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20161217194758.GB7888@spectrum.skysmurf.nl> References: <192c99ca-ed3b-44da-633a-99629fdcea70@marino.st> <20161217132608.GA1352@spectrum.skysmurf.nl> <54CEEF4F-3E62-45D1-902A-DA4372E9F060@freebsd.org> <20161217194758.GB7888@spectrum.skysmurf.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 17 Dec 2016, at 20:47, Alphons van Werven <freebsd@skysmurf.nl> wrote: >=20 > Michael Gmelin wrote: >=20 >> Maybe you could elaborate a bit more what you find so annoying about >> running "poudriere testport origin" before doing "svn commit" that you >> are willing to drop port maintainership over it? >=20 > Sure. In this case it's the precedent that bugs me. >=20 > Needless to say, not being a committer myself, whether/that said folks are= > required to use Poudriere and/or Synth for their QA checking is ipso facto= > none of my concern. However, I'm pretty sure I know what comes next. When > maintainers need to provide build/QA logs with their PRs (which I think in= > many cases makes perfect sense to request, BTW) soon enough Portupgrade or= > Portmaster logs, Portlint output, output of explicit > # make check-foo && make bar-qa && make love && make install > and such will cease to suffice and those logs will be going to have to be > Poudriere and/or Synth logs specifically. In other words: I suspect it > won't be long before port maintainership will de facto force maintainers > to install, learn and use Poudriere and/or Synth. And it just so happens > that for me the former in particular is a definite no go for flight. >=20 > To put things into perspective, I do feel compelled to point out that this= > is merely the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back. Or the spark > that ignited the gunpowder, if one happens to know what poudriere actually= > means. I've been a FreeBSD stalwart since the turn of the century (if not > slightly earlier) and for the most part it has been wonderful. But ever > since some time during the 9.X era I started to pick up signs that the > FreeBSD project as a whole is moving into a direction that troubles me--in= > some cases deeply indeed. Particularly during the last few months I found > myself increasingly strongly contemplating moving away from FreeBSD > altogether. And that is exactly what I've now decided to do. >=20 > There's nothing overly dramatic about that; it's a simple observation that= > too many things involving the FreeBSD project in general are going in what= > I consider undesirable directions, leading to the pragmatic conclusion > that, the past notwithstanding, FreeBSD is unfortunately no longer the > right operating system for me, neither personally nor professionally. >=20 > I'll assume the above was sufficiently elaborate. >=20 It was quite elaborate, but didn't really answer the question - it managed t= o explain your emotions though, maybe that was more important anyway. Attaching poudriere logs has been best practice for years now and I (using Fre= eBSD since the mid-90s) adapted quickly, as it made perfect sense to me and g= etting started with poudriere just took a couple of minutes. If anything, th= e situation got better this year, as we have a second option (synth) availab= le now. Anyway, it's sad to see you leave, thanks for all your contributions, I've b= een using some of your ports for years. -m=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2E32E0E1-C44F-497B-9852-6E2A6E331FD8>