On Oct 7, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Marcel Bischoff <mar...@herrbischoff.com> wrote: >>> It pains me to say that Homebrew is running circles around MacPorts in >>> the department of current available packages. >> >> [citation needed] ;-) > > Gladly. I have written a small script to check that. Here are a few of > the results (of some tools I work with/run on a daily basis): > > ghc > MacPorts version: 7.8.3_4 > Homebrew version: 8.0.1
https://trac.macports.org/ticket/48899 I don't see a patch attached there, but I imagine one could look at the homebrew recipe and pull out what is necessary? > fontforge > MacPorts version: 20120731_3 > Homebrew version: 20161001 > pandoc > MacPorts version: 1.12.4.2_1 > Homebrew version: 1.17.2 both of these are nomaintainer - we'd be happy to have you maintain the ports if you're interested in keeping them updated > mutt > MacPorts version: 1.6.0_1 > Homebrew version: 1.7.0 % port info mutt mutt @1.6.0_1 (mail) Replaced by: neomutt Description: This port has been replaced by neomutt. Homepage: https://www.macports.org/ Platforms: darwin License: unknown Maintainers: nomaintai...@macports.org (neomutt is @20161002) > boost > MacPorts version: 1.59.0_2 > Homebrew version: 1.62.0 > > fdupes > MacPorts version: 1.51 > Homebrew version: 1.6.1 > > imapsync > MacPorts version: 1.684 > Homebrew version: 1.727 > > notmuch > MacPorts version: 0.22.2 > Homebrew version: 0.23 > > sqlmap > MacPorts version: 0.9_1 > Homebrew version: 1.0.10 (I'm too lazy to look up why all of these might not be up to the current version - hopefully you've opened tickets [with patches wherever possible] on any of these you care about). >>> If time and manpower is the problem, wouldn't it be better to move to a >>> GitHub-based approach like Homebrew does? >> >> That doesn't necessarily fix the problem. It's worth noting that there >> already is a plan to transition to github. > > Why is that? moving to GitHub doesn't magically make more interested parties make quality contributions. > Also: what do you think the problem actually is and how to > rectify it? I'd be very interested to hear that. I'm not convinced there's a general problem (other than the continual need to try to get more people involved in the project). >>> This way far more people would >>> contribute. >> >> hopefully that's true, but there's no evidence to support that assertion at >> this time. > > Comparing the contribution rate of Homebrew to that of MacPorts, it > certainly wouldn't hurt things. I'm not aware of anyone who has actual numbers on this (keeping in mind that the respective user communities are different sizes). > On the contrary. Plus, you are just > stating the obvious: something has not been done in an exact way, > therefore there is no evidence that this exact way yields this exact > result. Duh. I'll be very pleased if you're right and that moving to GitHub will bring in a large volume of (new) high-quality submissions. -- Daniel J. Luke _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev