Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 18:15:49 -0400 From: "Donald J. Maddox" <dmaddox@scsn.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Current is currently really a mess (was: Re: Tk/Tcl broken(?)) Message-ID: <19970803181549.40721@scsn.net> In-Reply-To: <3326.870638153@time.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Sun, Aug 03, 1997 at 12:55:53PM -0700 References: <19970803201731.09375@klemm.gtn.com> <3326.870638153@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 03, 1997 at 12:55:53PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
<SNIP>
> to what I see for -current's future) then that's what -current is
> there for. It's a testing ground, not a place for hosting the ports
> collection.
The point has been raised that eventually -current will be *release*,
and that if -current is not actively supported by the ports system, then
there will eventually be 1250+ ports that will need re-porting. I have not
seen this point answered. Maybe I missed it.
A very clean solution to this mess has been proposed by David Nugent,
and seconded by Soren... All of the contentious software in question
*could* be maintained in src/release, and not interfere with the base system.
I cannot se a down-side to this solution. What (if anything) am I missing
here?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970803181549.40721>