On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 07:22:07 -0700 Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 03:56:58PM +0200, Rico Secada wrote: > > Simply put: "I am a maintainer of a port on FreeBSD, but I only > > have time to run current, and thus doesn't care a rats ass about if > > the port works on RELEASE, eventhough thats the most widely used > > version of FreeBSD." > > > > This can't be right! See bellow. And please send-pr(1) with the details of the problem. > You have to remember that with ports, it's at the discretion of > the port author to test his/her port on different architectures and > different setups. That said... The truth being that it's impossible to test on more that a few of them, especially at run-time. > The port is his responsibility: *PERIOD*. If he doesn't want the > responsibility of testing his work on non-CURRENT releases, then > he should either 1) find someone who can test it for him that > doesn't use CURENT, or 2) step down from maintaining the port. Actually no, we have to make sure the ports tagged for each RELEASE work with that release (or make them BROKEN/IGNORE appropriately) and the current ports tree works with the current -STABLE(s). [ .. ] -- IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" BOFH excuse #330: quantum decoherence
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
