Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 23:08:27 -0500 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org, linimon@FreeBSD.org, "Steven G. Kargl" <kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: ports/123879: databases/db41 fails during configure Message-ID: <20080528040827.GA29168@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <483C1EE3.8060900@gmx.de> References: <200805271413.m4REDbZ4051415@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <483C1EE3.8060900@gmx.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 04:46:59PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: > I suggest that you re-read > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/current-stable.html > > "23.2.1.3 What Is FreeBSD-CURRENT Not? > ... > 3. In any way “officially supported”. We do our best to help people > genuinely in one of the 3 “legitimate” FreeBSD-CURRENT groups, but we > simply do not have the time to provide tech support. This is not because we > are mean and nasty people who do not like helping people out (we would not > even be doing FreeBSD if we were). We simply cannot answer hundreds > messages a day and work on FreeBSD! Given the choice between improving > FreeBSD and answering lots of questions on experimental code, the > developers opt for the former." > > I claim the same exclusion for my ports support. That's not the way that portmgr has interpreted the committer's responsibilities in the past, fwiw. By the same logic as the above, you could say that no version of FreeBSD is "officially supported". Everything is done by volunteers on a best-effort basis. But traditionally, we have asked maintainers to try to keep things going on whatever is -current, as well as -stable. I know that's a lot to ask, but I don't see any other way to keep ports working on -current. Does anyone else have any suggestions? mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080528040827.GA29168>