Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 22:07:50 +0200 From: John Marino <freebsd.contact@marino.st> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org>, marino@freebsd.org, Cy Schubert <cy@FreeBSD.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r364739 - in head: . sysutils sysutils/syslog-ng-devel sysutils/syslog-ng-devel/files Message-ID: <53EA7416.5080008@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <53EA7155.4060606@FreeBSD.org> References: <53ea6d76.6eb9.5599e7c9@svn.freebsd.org> <53EA6EBB.2010802@marino.st> <53EA7155.4060606@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/12/2014 21:56, Bryan Drewery wrote: > On 8/12/2014 2:44 PM, John Marino wrote: >> On 8/12/2014 21:39, Cy Schubert wrote: >>> Author: cy >>> Date: Tue Aug 12 19:39:33 2014 >>> New Revision: 364739 >>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/364739 >>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r364739/ >>> >>> Log: >>> Reintroduce syslog-ng-devel for 3.6.0alpha2. >>> >>> Submitted by: Peter Czanik <peter.czanik@balabit.com> (syslog-ng upline) >> >> >> Do Ports really need alpha quality -devel ports in the collection? >> >> If it were up to me I'd purge 90% of our -devel ports. I tried to start >> a conversation about a policy for these with portmgr, but as usual, only >> one person responded. I'd still like to have that conversation though. >> This -devel port trend is disturbing. >> >> John >> > > Why? Devel ports need testing and there are many users willing to use > them. Poudriere-devel probably has more users than the main port right > now, judging from feedback I have received. As ports directly to improve FreeBSD infrastructure, poudriere-devel and pkg-devel are included in my 10%. (as in they are ok) As for why: 1) They become a burden on everyone, even if they have a maintainer. Sweeping changes have to be applied twice. 2) What if every port had a -devel version? Now we are taking 45k+ ports. 3) -devel versions are poor quality often 4) -devel versions are often neglected and are often older than the stable version To me, they are more trouble than they are worth especially when the ports are reset. I think there should be a pretty high bar for devel ports, and maintainer need to justify why they want to convert the FreeBSD community into a testers for third party software (which is the reason I've heard). With the exception of FreeBSD functionality, keep the testing out of ports. It will improve the quality and easy our collective maintenance burder. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53EA7416.5080008>