Nikolay Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Deanna Phillips [2006-07-21]:
>> One of the greatest things for me, as a user, has been that I >> can completely trust the decisions made about what does and >> does not go into this OS. Even ports. Take that away and >> what do you have? > > Those decisions don't exist. We add ports for all sorts of > crappy software. Submit a port for an interesting software > full of non-obvious bugs and it will be committed (assuming a > committer notices the submission). There are some conspicuously missing ports. I think (hope) you know this. > Just look at nagios and it's related ports, total crap but > there's nothing better out there, I needed the port, so I did > it. This simplifies life for people in a similar situation > (having to use nagios), while it certainly is no statement of > encouragement to use it. As I said in another followup, I'm not talking about the quality of ports. I'm talking about free vs non-free software, which is what this thread was about in the first place. Thinking ahead about a -trend- that could be counterproductive if followed. Not the odd port that's an exceptional case. You seem to want to dismiss this (and me) because it's inconvenient. If you choose to dismiss the users who care about open source, what users will you be left with? > I think I made my point clear, so please answer in private > mail if you want to discuss anything. No thanks.
