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
ports I might identify as "popular", because it would interfere with
their plans to trim the portstree.
Re-read the thread. At every point I'm talking about looking for ports
I (and others) might want to maintain, as a service to their users. Now
ask yourself why I've been getting so much resistance to that, when we
keep hearing how deprecated ports can be easily resurrected if someone
steps up to maintain them?
Every response from the committers ignored what I said I was trying to
do, and instead repeated the same old arguments about stale,
unfetchable, broken or superceded ports. That "talking points" response
tells me that they didn't want me doing what I was doing to buck an
already-established policy of letting unmaintained ports die unless and
until someone complains.
Today wasn't the first time I've had this discussion with them. But it
was the last straw as far as I'm concerned.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
