On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 22:15:58 PDT Zhihao Yuan wrote:
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote:
Well, due to some serious philosophical differences re these
deprecation campaigns and what seems to be resistance to any further
discussion, I don't think I can
sorry for the top post, but shouolder is killing me.
idea 1: can the 'summer of code' guys help us out with this.
idea 2. why oh why can we not live with the fbsd and debian
paradigm?
the reason i've kept my domain here at home is because i like the
flexibility i see. but keeping ports
Since we're already in the mood to discuss FreeBSD ports issues, maybe
somebody can clear something up for me.
Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
ports/156541 [MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release version
and add C++
Nobody has touched it, but many other
On 4/27/2011 8:09 AM, Charlie Kester wrote:
I've been told that we shouldn't be looking for reasons to save any
unmaintained port, and I was specifically told this in response to my
efforts to identify ports that have a lot of users. So I don't think
current policy supports the conclusion that
On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 23:27:40 PDT John Marino wrote:
You're just sulking because your idea of identifying popular ports
wasn't met with enthusiasm.
No, it's more than that. I got the distinct impression that many of the
committers would be unhappy if I took maintainership of some of the
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 23:27:40 PDT John Marino wrote:
You're just sulking because your idea of identifying popular ports
wasn't met with enthusiasm.
No, it's more than that. I got the distinct impression that many of the
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:05:43AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
Since we're already in the mood to discuss FreeBSD ports issues, maybe
somebody can clear something up for me.
Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
ports/156541 [MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino freebs...@marino.st wrote:
Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
ports/156541 [MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release version and
add C++
Nobody has touched it, but many other PRs after that submission have been
Hi!
No, it's more than that. I got the distinct impression that many of the
committers would be unhappy if I took maintainership of some of the
ports I might identify as popular, because it would interfere with
their plans to trim the portstree.
Then you have misunderstood things. I
Dear Mr.
I noticed the ntp-devel port has not been updated in nearly 6 months.
The port currently has ntp version 4.2.7p78, while the current
development version at ntp.org is 4.2.7p158.
Do you have any plans in the near future to keep the development ntp
port more up to date with ntp.org?
Best
Where is the current list of deprecated ports?
You can find the deprecated ones here
http://www.freshports.org/ports-deprecated.php
and the one set to expire there :
http://www.freshports.org/ports-expiration-date.php
regards,
Bapt
___
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
My search for popularity metrics is intended to point me, as a
maintainer, to ports I might want to adopt now, rather than wait for
someone to complain about them. Everything *I* use is already
maintained, so I've moved on to
From: Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:14:41 +0100
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: saving a few ports from death
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
My search for popularity metrics is intended to point me, as a
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:49:58 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 23:27:40 PDT John Marino wrote:
You're just sulking because your idea of identifying popular ports
wasn't met with
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400
arrowdodger 6year...@gmail.com articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino freebs...@marino.st
wrote:
Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
ports/156541 [MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release
version and
On 27 Apr 2011 12:55, Jerry je...@seibercom.net wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400
arrowdodger 6year...@gmail.com articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino freebs...@marino.st
wrote:
Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
ports/156541
If after this thread you still want to drop maintership I'd like the following:
deskutils/teapot
math/ised
security/ccrypt
sysutils/moreutils
sysutils/moreutils-parallel
I've been told that we shouldn't be looking for reasons to save any
unmaintained port,
What you have been told is
Jerry writes:
Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck.
Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
broken, is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system where
each submitted PR is assigned a specific number (I believe it is
actually)
Eitan Adler wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Kurt Jaeger li...@opsec.eu wrote:
Then you have misunderstood things. I don't think anybody would be
unhappy if you (or anybody else) took maintainership of one or more of
the currently unmaintained ports.
There are two things.
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100
Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com articulated:
How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.
Allowing a submitter to languish for an indeterminate period without
any notification of what is transpiring with his/her submission is not
So, if the maintainers of the small leaf ports would be able
to commit their work themselves, it would free the ports committers
with the large ports projects on their hands to work on those ?
Would this work ?
If you look through this list's archives I actually proposed this idea
myself
Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially broken,
is far from ideal.
Speaking as a ports committer, I do agree with you that the current workflow
that we have in place is less then ideal for the size of the ports tree as well
as the number of patches that we receive.
When
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
Robert Huff roberth...@rcn.com articulated:
Jerry writes:
Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck.
Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
broken, is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:17:46 -0400
Steven Kreuzer skreu...@freebsd.org articulated:
Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
broken, is far from ideal.
Speaking as a ports committer, I do agree with you that the current
workflow that we have in place is less then
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update to
an older port or even a new port submission for that matter. I see no
logical reason for a committer to bypass an item simple based
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update
to an older port or even a new port
I am having the exact same problem with a brand new FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE
install and a fresh squeezeboxserver (v7.5.3) port build.
(Slimserver was working fine under FreeBSD 6.2, until I tried to get
miniDLNA working, as well, for a BluRay player access to same music library.
sigh)
Any solutions
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:35:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:49:58 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 23:27:40 PDT John Marino wrote:
...
Every response
Quoth Eric on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
From: Anton Shterenlikht me...@bristol.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:14:41 +0100
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: saving a few ports from death
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
My search for
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Mark Linimon lini...@lonesome.com wrote:
I need to migrate portsmon to another server so that we can start up
these periodic emails again.
mcl
___
With the large number of ports to be maintained , tasks to be
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:02:34AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
Quoth Eric on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
...
My search for popularity metrics is intended to point me, as a
maintainer, to ports I might want to adopt now, rather than wait for
someone to complain about them. Everything *I* use
Eitan Adler wrote:
There is a lot of work that has to be done in the background even if
no new ports are added. Things like the gmake upgrade and new ports
features take a lot of time. Furthermore adding a port seems to be a
trivial task, however the committers have to (a) fix it up if it is
On 27 April 2011 13:54, Kurt Jaeger li...@opsec.eu wrote:
Eitan Adler wrote:
Things like the gmake upgrade and new ports
features take a lot of time. Furthermore adding a port seems to be a
trivial task, however the committers have to (a) fix it up if it is
formatted badly (b) test it in a
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:15:07AM -0700, spotter wrote:
I am having the exact same problem with a brand new FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE
install and a fresh squeezeboxserver (v7.5.3) port build.
(Slimserver was working fine under FreeBSD 6.2, until I tried to get
miniDLNA working, as well, for a
On -10.01.-28163 14:59, Robert Huff wrote:
It is also possible it is only important to a fairly small
number ... but to those it is absolutely crucial.
Or the port might become useful/essential/critical to somebody in the future...
What is not broken -- just old, like databases/db2 or
On 04/27/2011 08:59, Mikhail T. wrote:
What is not broken -- just old, like ... or www/apache13*
apache13 is way past EOL, and the apache team is working hard to move
the default to apache22, at which point I personally hope that apache13
dies a quick and painful death :)
--
Quoth Eitan Adler on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
What is not broken -- just old, like databases/db2 or www/apache13*, for
example -- should be left alone (until it becomes both broken and
unmaintained). And even then, the removal should not be
mass-scale/automatic...
This recent sweep
On 4/27/2011 4:12 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulssonertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
Very simple. A particular committer during one particular period of
time maybe only 45 minutes of free time to spend
On 27 April 2011 13:54, Jerry je...@seibercom.net wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100
Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com articulated:
How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.
Allowing a submitter to languish for an indeterminate period without
any notification
On Apr 27, 2011, at 13:46 , Chip Camden wrote:
Modifying the script that was posted earlier, we can list out all
installed ports that are currently deprecated, and why:
Won't work -- need to handle slave ports etc, where the DEPRECATED may be in
the MASTER_PORT.
Try this:
#!/bin/sh
#
On 04/27/2011 06:45, Jerry wrote:
I think that 'UPDATING' the PR to let the submitter know
that he/she has not been forgotten and to keep them aware of any
problems with the PR is certainly a welcome suggestion. Unfortunately,
that is rarely presently done.
If the PR is still open, it has not
(Sorry for the noise earlier about the PBIs not working under PC-BSD;
I'm not sure how I missed that had been already reported).
I tried the new amd64 PBI and I am able to successfully start VMs now.
I had one VM(running some relatively recent version of amd64 HEAD)
boot up fine, but a second
On 4/27/2011 8:55 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
I honestly don't think that there's much wrong with the system as it
is; once you get better at making submissions, taking time to read the
Porter's Handbook your patches become committed more and more quickly.
Chris
Come on. There's no relationship
On 27.04.2011 14:16, Eitan Adler wrote:
Then bapt@ marked the ports*deprecated* which does not mean deleted. It was a
warning that people who were interested should step up and take up the work. If
after N amount of time no one does so they will be individually deleted.
The ports I listed --
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:28:11 -0400, Ryan Stone wrote:
(Sorry for the noise earlier about the PBIs not working under PC-BSD;
I'm not sure how I missed that had been already reported).
I tried the new amd64 PBI and I am able to successfully start VMs now.
I had one VM(running some relatively
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 04:03:58PM -0400, Mikhail T. wrote:
On 27.04.2011 14:16, Eitan Adler wrote:
Then bapt@ marked the ports*deprecated* which does not mean deleted. It
was a warning that people who were interested should step up and take up
the work. If after N amount of time no one
dougb is anxious to delete apache13 as well instead of simply disowning it...
The upstream maintainer already called it end of life. FreeBSD does
not and will not ever take over the development of dead upstream ports
(and in this case there is a upstream version)
The same entity(ies), that
On 27.04.2011 16:47, Wesley Shields wrote:
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
If upstream says it's dead, who are we to keep it alive?
We are a major Operating System project, which maintains ports of third-party
applications for the
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
fix it? If yes are we to host the patches? Where should the bug
reports go to - our bug tracker? What if our implementation ceases to
On Wed 27 Apr 2011 at 14:05:57 PDT Eitan Adler wrote:
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
fix it?
No. The rule of caveat emptor should apply. We don't warranty
Quoth Ade Lovett on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
On Apr 27, 2011, at 13:46 , Chip Camden wrote:
Modifying the script that was posted earlier, we can list out all
installed ports that are currently deprecated, and why:
Won't work -- need to handle slave ports etc, where the DEPRECATED may
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
fix it? If yes are we to host the patches? Where should the bug
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:54:05PM +0200, John Marino wrote:
On 4/27/2011 4:12 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulssonertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
Very simple. A particular committer during one
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:12:57AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
However, I do find troubling you statement regarding
On 4/28/2011 12:18 AM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
And if the committers can't choose what they are going to work on, you
are likely going find yourself with a lot fewer committers fairly soon.
As you notice, I never said they are limited what they work on. The
order of the work is the focus.
On 2011-04-27 17:59, Mikhail T. wrote:
On -10.01.-28163 14:59, Robert Huff wrote:
It is also possible it is only important to a fairly small
number ... but to those it is absolutely crucial.
Or the port might become useful/essential/critical to somebody in the
future...
What is not
On 2011-04-27 16:12, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update
to an older
On 04/27/2011 15:39, John Marino wrote:
As you notice, I never said they are limited what they work on. The
order of the work is the focus.
John,
You (and others) seem to be very focused on the idea of what's fair.
Specifically you seem to believe that FreeBSD committers have a duty to
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:33:05 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:12:57AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
On
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:54:45 +0200
Olli Hauer oha...@freebsd.org articulated:
Maybe you have some time to spend?
Before I could reasonable be expected to set aside time, I would need a
detailed job description, etcetera. Perhaps you can supply me with one?
If my quick lookup was not totally
On Wed 27 Apr 2011 at 16:15:19 PDT Jerry wrote:
Following through on that logic, only the highest priority items would
ever get done. Since there is a never ending list of things that have
to be done at any given time, the lowest priority ones would never get
any attention.
Which is as it
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:39:52AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
On 4/28/2011 12:18 AM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
And if the committers can't choose what they are going to work on, you
are likely going find yourself with a lot fewer committers fairly soon.
As you notice, I never said they are
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Bernhard Froehlich de...@freebsd.orgwrote:
It's about two months since the last call for testers and a lot of
bugfixing has happened since then. Not all of the reported problems were
FreeBSD related which is a good indication that we're not too far behind
the
63 matches
Mail list logo
