On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 15:34:00 -0700 (PDT), JoelFRodriguez wrote:
Are you serious? Upgrading the OS on a production machine is a really
steep
price to pay. I've over a thousand working ports and numerous
customers that
I would have to port afterwards.
You really can't fix what appears to be a reasonable request?
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/devel-icu-help-tp4600103p4660554.html
Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
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"
well we already support 3 version at the same time, which can be
complicated sometime, if we had a fix we would provide it, if someone
comes with fix I'll be happy to integrate it.
But the rules about EOL are clear, and it is easy for production to
have a clear statement on what will be supported and what won't, and to
organize themself with the informations. the portstree is also tagged
when EOL occurs, so why still updating the ports tree after the dead
line?
Another solution can be to pay some freelance to do the fix if really
needed.
icu is a complicated ports and not an easy one to maintain, keeping the
version working on 3 OSes (7 8 and 9) is already a pain.
Last it's free software, you can contribute, maybe you have a fix to
propose, I'll be glad to commit it.
regards,
Bapt
_______________________________________________
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"
