Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 12:50:00 GMT From: Jesse Smith <jessefrgsmith@yahoo.ca> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/190284: port update: sysutils/cpulimit Message-ID: <201405271250.s4RCo0As050855@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/190284; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Jesse Smith <jessefrgsmith@yahoo.ca> To: milki <milki@FreeBSD.org>, bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Cc: swills@FreeBSD.org, eadler@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/190284: port update: sysutils/cpulimit Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:34:09 -0300 On 14-05-27 04:25 AM, milki wrote: > Hi Jesse, > > This update seems to be overloaded. 2.2 is now pointing to a new fork of > the original cpulimit while cpulimit has been relaunched on github. > > Would it be more wise to split this port into two with sysutils/limitcpu > from http://limitcpu.sourceforge.net/ and sysutils/cpulimit from > https://github.com/opsengine/cpulimit ? > First, I would like to point out that the cpulimit port has been pointing to the new location for a few versions now. Anything past 1.1 would be the new upstream version and the last version of the FreeBSD port was 1.4. We have been using the fork for over a year now in Ports. Second, the github project is a sort of staging area for experimental features and does not collaborate with download (Fedora, Debian, FreeBSD). The LimitCPU branch is where stable features are implemented and where downstream projects can submit patches to fix issues. Keeping these things in mind, there really is not anything to be gained from maintaining two separate ports. Nor, in my opinion, any reason to make a port for the github project since it makes no effort to be FreeBSD compatible. Jesse
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201405271250.s4RCo0As050855>