Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 4 Aug 1997 16:42:38 +0200
From:      Mark Huizer <xaa@stack.nl>
To:        "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Cc:        Wolfgang Helbig <helbig@MX.BA-Stuttgart.De>, current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?))
Message-ID:  <19970804164238.16405@xaa.stack.nl>
In-Reply-To: <742.870702685@time.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Mon, Aug 04, 1997 at 06:51:25AM -0700
References:  <199708032243.AAA01485@helbig.informatik.ba-stuttgart.de> <742.870702685@time.cdrom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> It also still comes as something of a shock to me that many of the
> people in this discussion who have been vehemently defending the idea
> of maintaining a -current ports collection also go strangely silent
> when this point is brought up.  I guess that when it comes right down
> to it, developers will always defend their interests first but I'd
> hoped we might at least be a little less *obvious* about that. :)
> 
> 					Jordan

Well... I would seriously dislike the idea of ports not working on current,
since I run that at home. But I like ports for stable too, since I run it
on cvsup.nl.freebsd.org. But that's only two releases. What about 2.1.*?

Maybe, just maybe... I wouldn't mind the effort of checking the ports being
laid in the hands of the porters/maintainers, but that might mean some
sort of way to make sure I can work on the relevant architectures. I have
current and 2.2 so that should suffice, but the others? I don't know.

Mark



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970804164238.16405>