On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 07:46:00PM +0000, David Uhden Collado wrote: [...] Anthony's mail was perfectly on point and you're just ignoring it.
> As for AI, I think reducing the discussion to "the Makefile is too long" Pointless complexity is a liability. Several seasoned porters have commented on this matter already. > or "the email is too long to read" Writing walls of text means you're effectively wasting the time of other contributors. Using LLMs to generate said text would just be the cherry on top, because it's so easy. Read: lazy. > is a poor argument against complexity. It > effectively defines acceptable complexity according to what someone feels > like reviewing manually "manually"... You're talking about human beings using their brain, time and goodwill to review your stuff. Don't assume people will use AI tools to review your mails. In fact, assume the opposite. > rather than according to what the software actually requires. Anthony's proposal proved that your overly complex take could be handled in a much more elegant and easy to understand manner, following the idioms used in the rest of the ports tree. So you're making a poor argument for unwarranted complexity. As a wannabe ports contributor you're bound to listen to what people here say, instead of nitpicking, pretending you were right and changing the subject. If you don't listen, people will ignore you, and very rightly so. Stop using AI to generate ports. Use your brain, type stuff. And pleaaase, stop drowning people with pointless blabla. -- jca
