On 01/20/2012 16:08, David Rawson Couzelis wrote:
> Of course using a package manager is better than installing using "make
> install". I think everyone agrees on that. But that doesn't mean the
> files used by a package manager should be provided by the package
> developer. That's what package maintainers are for.
If everyone who is interested in providing the package infrastructure
for their OS/distro/whatever is allowed to include them on an equal
footing, what is the harm?
I'm sensitive to your argument that this may not be the right place for
that, but in general I feel that "people find this useful" trumps "not
100% technically correct."
Doug
PS, speaking as FreeBSD maintainer for windowmaker, I'm not interested
in including a port framework in the windowmaker dist file, but I'm also
not opposed to others doing so if they wish.
--
It's always a long day; 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
