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
p
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
> 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 ma
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:05:43AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
> Since we're already in the mood to discuss FreeBSD ports issues, maybe
> somebody can clear something up for me.
>
> Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
> ports/156541 "[MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux t
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino wrote:
> Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
> ports/156541 "[MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release version and
> add C++"
>
> Nobody has touched it, but many other PRs after that submission have been
> assigned, et
Hi!
> > 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.
> Then you have misunderstood th
Dear Mr.
I noticed the ntp-devel port has not been updated in nearly 6 months.
The port currently has ntp version 4.2.7p78, while the current
development version at ntp.org is 4.2.7p158.
Do you have any plans in the near future to keep the development ntp
port more up to date with ntp.org?
Best r
> Where is the current list of deprecated ports?
>
You can find the deprecated ones here
http://www.freshports.org/ports-deprecated.php
and the one set to expire there :
http://www.freshports.org/ports-expiration-date.php
regards,
Bapt
___
freebsd-port
On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
>
> My search for "popularity" metrics is intended to point me, as a
> maintainer, to ports I might want to adopt now, rather than wait for
> someone to complain about them. Everything *I* use is already
> maintained, so I've moved o
> From: Anton Shterenlikht
> Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:14:41 +0100
> To:
> Subject: Re: saving a few ports from death
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
>>
>> My search for "popularity" metrics is intended to point me, as a
>> maintainer, to ports I might want t
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:49:58 +0200
Erik Trulsson articulated:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
> > 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.
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400
arrowdodger <6year...@gmail.com> articulated:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino
> wrote:
>
> > Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
> > ports/156541 "[MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release
> > version and add C++
On 27 Apr 2011 12:55, "Jerry" wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400
> arrowdodger <6year...@gmail.com> articulated:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
> > > ports/156541 "[MAINTAINER] Up
If after this thread you still want to drop maintership I'd like the following:
>>> deskutils/teapot
>>> math/ised
>>> security/ccrypt
>>> sysutils/moreutils
>>> sysutils/moreutils-parallel
>> I've been told that we shouldn't be looking for reasons to save any
> unmaintained port,
What you have b
Jerry writes:
> > Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck.
>
> Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
> broken, is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system where
> each submitted PR is assigned a specific number (I believe it is
> actua
Eitan Adler wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:23 AM, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> > Then you have misunderstood things. I don't think anybody would be
> > unhappy if you (or anybody else) took maintainership of one or more of
> > the currently unmaintained ports.
>
> > There are two things. Becoming a
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100
Chris Rees articulated:
> How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.
Allowing a submitter to languish for an indeterminate period without
any notification of what is transpiring with his/her submission is not
respectful, it is benign
> So, if the maintainers of the small leaf ports would be able
> to commit their work themselves, it would free the ports committers
> with the large ports projects on their hands to work on those ?
>
> Would this work ?
If you look through this list's archives I actually proposed this idea
myself
> Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially broken,
> is far from ideal.
Speaking as a ports committer, I do agree with you that the current workflow
that we have in place is less then ideal for the size of the ports tree as well
as the number of patches that we receive.
Whe
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
Robert Huff articulated:
>
> Jerry writes:
>
> > > Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck.
> >
> > Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
> > broken, is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system where
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:17:46 -0400
Steven Kreuzer articulated:
> > Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially
> > broken, is far from ideal.
>
> Speaking as a ports committer, I do agree with you that the current
> workflow that we have in place is less then ideal for the si
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
>
> However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update to
> an older port or even a new port submission for that matter. I see no
> logical reason for a committer to bypass an item simple b
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson articulated:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
> >
> > However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update
> > to an older port or even a new port submission for that ma
I am having the exact same problem with a brand new FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE
install and a fresh squeezeboxserver (v7.5.3) port build.
(Slimserver was working fine under FreeBSD 6.2, until I tried to get
miniDLNA working, as well, for a BluRay player access to same music library.
sigh)
Any solutions wor
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:35:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 09:49:58 +0200
> Erik Trulsson articulated:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:15:43AM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
> > > On Tue 26 Apr 2011 at 23:27:40 PDT John Marino wrote:
> > > >
...
> > >
> > > Every response from t
Quoth Eric on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
> > From: Anton Shterenlikht
> > Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:14:41 +0100
> > To:
> > Subject: Re: saving a few ports from death
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 03:55:56PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote:
> >>
> >> My search for "popularity" metrics is intended
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Mark Linimon wrote:
> I need to migrate portsmon to another server so that we can start up
> these periodic emails again.
>
> mcl
> ___
>
With the large number of ports to be maintained , tasks to be performed
becomes
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:02:34AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
> Quoth Eric on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
...
> > >> My search for "popularity" metrics is intended to point me, as a
> > >> maintainer, to ports I might want to adopt now, rather than wait for
> > >> someone to complain about them. Ever
Eitan Adler wrote:
> There is a lot of work that has to be done in the background even if
> no new ports are added. Things like the gmake upgrade and new ports
> features take a lot of time. Furthermore adding a port seems to be a
> "trivial" task, however the committers have to (a) fix it up if
On 27 April 2011 13:54, Kurt Jaeger wrote:
> Eitan Adler wrote:
>> Things like the gmake upgrade and new ports
>> features take a lot of time. Furthermore adding a port seems to be a
>> "trivial" task, however the committers have to (a) fix it up if it is
>> formatted badly (b) test it in a tinde
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 07:15:07AM -0700, spotter wrote:
> I am having the exact same problem with a brand new FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE
> install and a fresh squeezeboxserver (v7.5.3) port build.
> (Slimserver was working fine under FreeBSD 6.2, until I tried to get
> miniDLNA working, as well, for a Bl
On -10.01.-28163 14:59, Robert Huff wrote:
It is also possible it is only important to a fairly small
number ... but to those it is absolutely crucial.
Or the port might become useful/essential/critical to somebody in the future...
What is not broken -- just old, like databases/db2 or
> What is not broken -- just old, like databases/db2 or www/apache13*, for
> example -- should be left alone (until it becomes both broken and
> unmaintained). And even then, the removal should not be
> mass-scale/automatic...
This recent sweep was neither mass scale nor automatic.
536/22816 port
On 04/27/2011 08:59, Mikhail T. wrote:
What is not broken -- just old, like ... or www/apache13*
apache13 is way past EOL, and the apache team is working hard to move
the default to apache22, at which point I personally hope that apache13
dies a quick and painful death :)
--
Nothin
Quoth Eitan Adler on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
> > What is not broken -- just old, like databases/db2 or www/apache13*, for
> > example -- should be left alone (until it becomes both broken and
> > unmaintained). And even then, the removal should not be
> > mass-scale/automatic...
>
> This recent
On 4/27/2011 4:12 PM, Jerry wrote:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
Erik Trulsson articulated:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
Very simple. A particular committer during one particular period of
time maybe only 45 minutes of free time to spend on handling PRs.
If the
On 27 April 2011 13:54, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100
> Chris Rees articulated:
>
>> How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.
>
> Allowing a submitter to languish for an indeterminate period without
> any notification of what is transpiring with h
On Apr 27, 2011, at 13:46 , Chip Camden wrote:
>
> Modifying the script that was posted earlier, we can list out all
> installed ports that are currently deprecated, and why:
Won't work -- need to handle slave ports etc, where the DEPRECATED may be in
the MASTER_PORT.
Try this:
#!/bin/sh
#
PO
On 04/27/2011 06:45, Jerry wrote:
I think that 'UPDATING' the PR to let the submitter know
that he/she has not been forgotten and to keep them aware of any
problems with the PR is certainly a welcome suggestion. Unfortunately,
that is rarely presently done.
If the PR is still open, it has not b
(Sorry for the noise earlier about the PBIs not working under PC-BSD;
I'm not sure how I missed that had been already reported).
I tried the new amd64 PBI and I am able to successfully start VMs now.
I had one VM(running some relatively recent version of amd64 HEAD)
boot up fine, but a second one
On 4/27/2011 8:55 PM, Chris Rees wrote:
I honestly don't think that there's much wrong with the system as it
is; once you get better at making submissions, taking time to read the
Porter's Handbook your patches become committed more and more quickly.
Chris
Come on. There's no relationship betw
On 27.04.2011 14:16, Eitan Adler wrote:
Then bapt@ marked the ports*deprecated* which does not mean deleted. It was a
warning that people who were interested should step up and take up the work. If
after N amount of time no one does so they will be individually deleted.
The ports I listed -- d
On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:28:11 -0400, Ryan Stone wrote:
> (Sorry for the noise earlier about the PBIs not working under PC-BSD;
> I'm not sure how I missed that had been already reported).
>
> I tried the new amd64 PBI and I am able to successfully start VMs now.
> I had one VM(running some relativ
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 04:03:58PM -0400, Mikhail T. wrote:
> On 27.04.2011 14:16, Eitan Adler wrote:
> > Then bapt@ marked the ports*deprecated* which does not mean deleted. It
> > was a warning that people who were interested should step up and take up
> > the work. If after N amount of time n
>dougb is anxious to delete apache13 as well instead of simply disowning it...
The upstream maintainer already called it "end of life". FreeBSD does
not and will not ever take over the development of dead upstream ports
(and in this case there is a upstream version)
>The same entity(ies), that cu
On 27.04.2011 16:47, Wesley Shields wrote:
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
If upstream says it's dead, who are we to keep it alive?
We are a major Operating System project, which maintains ports of third-party
applications for the conven
>> apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
>
> Why not, exactly?..
What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
fix it? If yes are we to host the patches? Where should the bug
reports go to - our bug tracker? What if our implementation ceases t
On Wed 27 Apr 2011 at 14:05:57 PDT Eitan Adler wrote:
apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
Why not, exactly?..
What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
fix it?
No. The rule of caveat emptor should apply. We don't warranty anyth
Quoth Ade Lovett on Wednesday, 27 April 2011:
> On Apr 27, 2011, at 13:46 , Chip Camden wrote:
> >
> > Modifying the script that was posted earlier, we can list out all
> > installed ports that are currently deprecated, and why:
>
> Won't work -- need to handle slave ports etc, where the DEPRECAT
Eitan, you are entitled to your opinions, but not to your own facts. My factual
corrections are inline below. Arguing about opinions and policy is useless until
the facts are accepted as such by all participants:
On 27.04.2011 16:54, Eitan Adler wrote:
The upstream maintainer already called
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 05:05:57PM -0400, Eitan Adler wrote:
> >> apache13 is EOL upstream. We should not have ports for EOL software.
> >
> > Why not, exactly?..
>
> What happens if a security hole or a bug is found? Are we the ones to
> fix it? If yes are we to host the patches? Where should the
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 08:54:05PM +0200, John Marino wrote:
> On 4/27/2011 4:12 PM, Jerry wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
> > Erik Trulsson articulated:
> >
> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> >> Very simple. A particular committer during one particular pe
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:12:57AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
> Erik Trulsson articulated:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
> > >
> > > However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large
On 4/28/2011 12:18 AM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
And if the committers can't choose what they are going to work on, you
are likely going find yourself with a lot fewer committers fairly soon.
As you notice, I never said they are limited what they work on. The
order of the work is the focus.
And
On 2011-04-27 17:59, Mikhail T. wrote:
> On -10.01.-28163 14:59, Robert Huff wrote:
>> It is also possible it is only important to a fairly small
>> number ... but to those it is absolutely crucial.
> Or the port might become useful/essential/critical to somebody in the
> future...
>
> What i
On 2011-04-27 16:12, Jerry wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
> Erik Trulsson articulated:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -0400
>>>
>>> However, I do find troubling you statement regarding a large update
>>> to an older port o
On 04/27/2011 15:39, John Marino wrote:
As you notice, I never said they are limited what they work on. The
order of the work is the focus.
John,
You (and others) seem to be very focused on the idea of what's "fair."
Specifically you seem to believe that FreeBSD committers have a duty to
ha
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:33:05 +0200
Erik Trulsson articulated:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:12:57AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:48:36 +0200
> > Erik Trulsson articulated:
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:32:58AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 08:50:52 -040
On 04/27/2011 13:54, Eitan Adler wrote:
Which is a*major* drain of resources. One of the reasons for ceasing
the building of packages for broken/completely obsolete is to avoid
draining the computer time building said packages.
... and in addition to CPU cycles there is also storage on the doz
On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 00:54:45 +0200
Olli Hauer articulated:
> Maybe you have some time to spend?
Before I could reasonable be expected to set aside time, I would need a
detailed job description, etcetera. Perhaps you can supply me with one?
> If my quick lookup was not totally wrong I cannot fin
On Wed 27 Apr 2011 at 16:15:19 PDT Jerry wrote:
Following through on that logic, only the highest priority items would
ever get done. Since there is a never ending list of things that have
to be done at any given time, the lowest priority ones would never get
any attention.
Which is as it sho
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:39:52AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
> On 4/28/2011 12:18 AM, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> > And if the committers can't choose what they are going to work on, you
> > are likely going find yourself with a lot fewer committers fairly soon.
> >
> As you notice, I never said they ar
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:01 AM, Bernhard Froehlich wrote:
> It's about two months since the last call for testers and a lot of
> bugfixing has happened since then. Not all of the reported problems were
> FreeBSD related which is a good indication that we're not too far behind
> the stability of t
62 matches
Mail list logo
