Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

> From: Marc Espie > Date: 2019-04-06 13:24:35 > Message-ID: 20190406132435.GA7545 () lain ! home > [Download RAW message or body] > > On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 07:11:57AM -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > > You are correct its not my process, but I am still curious as to the > >

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 07:11:57AM -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > You are correct its not my process, but I am still curious as to the > rationale which is just a question that was not answered. Nowhere did I > suggest, or imply, that it should be changed. There's no rationale. Just

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

On 4/5/19 7:44 AM, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: Is this due to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason (lack of manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the project)? This wording is one of several things that led to accusations of disrespect. If I said

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

On 2019/04/05 06:44, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > Could you please explain the logic behind this as I am confused. Is this due > to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason (lack of > manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the project)? You seem to disagree

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 06:44:36AM -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > Could you please explain the logic behind this as I am confused. Is this due > to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason (lack of > manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the project)?

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

Apr 05, 2019 at 07:20:49AM -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > Do you have documentation on this process? I would be happy to read it and > ask questions you feel may be better. As an open source project I am > surprised about the lack of transparency for various things. You will find several

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 06:44:36AM -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: > Could you please explain the logic behind this as I am confused. Is this due > to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason (lack of > manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the project)?

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

>Do you have documentation on this process? I would be happy to read it >and ask questions you feel may be better. As an open source project I am >surprised about the lack of transparency for various things. Such strong words! >I have opinions yes, but I also try to understand those of others

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

Do you have documentation on this process? I would be happy to read it and ask questions you feel may be better. As an open source project I am surprised about the lack of transparency for various things. I have opinions yes, but I also try to understand those of others which is what prompted

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

>You are correct its not my process, but I am still curious as to the >rationale which is just a question that was not answered. Nowhere did I >suggest, or imply, that it should be changed. > >And how do you define crappier releases? If something is stable enough >that the development team

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

You are correct its not my process, but I am still curious as to the rationale which is just a question that was not answered. Nowhere did I suggest, or imply, that it should be changed. And how do you define crappier releases? If something is stable enough that the development team decide to

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

>Could you please explain the logic behind this as I am confused. Is this >due to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason >(lack of manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the >project)? Are you somehow tracking submissions to take care of when this

Re: Ports tree locked for 6.5 release

Could you please explain the logic behind this as I am confused. Is this due to an inefficient process, technical limitation, or other reason (lack of manpower doesn't qualify as that seems self inflicted by the project)? Are you somehow tracking submissions to take care of when this unlocked

Re: Ports tree locked

On 2018-03-25, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > The ports tree is now locked for the 6.3 release. ... and unlocked again. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

Re: ports tree locked

What's happening with m68k? No snapshot package update since 4.3. Are they halted until the linker/binutil issue is resolved? Is that likely to be fixed in 4.4? (Is that issue just mac68k?) Probably going to miss 4.4. Well, systems (including xenocara) will be built for 4.4, but is

Re: ports tree locked

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Hugo Villeneuve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:27:44PM -0700, Peter Valchev wrote: With the python fixes just making it in, the tree is now locked for the 4.4 release. Thanks to everyone who tested! What's happening with m68k? No snapshot

Re: ports tree locked

On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 08:27:44PM -0700, Peter Valchev wrote: With the python fixes just making it in, the tree is now locked for the 4.4 release. Thanks to everyone who tested! What's happening with m68k? No snapshot package update since 4.3. Are they halted until the linker/binutil issue