On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 06:36:46PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > Am 08.09.2011 16:15, schrieb Mikhail T.: > > > Having a poor port of an obscure > > piece of software is better, than no port at all. > > A poor port is undesirable (and shouldn't be in the tree in the first > place).
Highly debatable. It is clear that a poor port is undesirable compared to a good port, but very often a poor port is more desirable than no port at all. > > An obscure piece of software is undesirable (and shouldn't be ported in > the first place). Bullshit! Keep in mind that FreeBSD itself is a fairly obscure piece of software in that most people in the world have never heard of it. For any given individual something like 90+% percent of the ports in the ports-tree could count as obscure since that person has never heard of that particular piece of software before. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se _______________________________________________ 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"
