From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 7 18:37:07 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C0DA10656B4 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:37:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0B08FC08 for ; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:37:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 17766 invoked by uid 399); 7 Sep 2010 18:37:05 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.142?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 7 Sep 2010 18:37:05 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4C868650.7090504@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 11:37:04 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lapo Luchini References: <4C866AB3.4030802@lapo.it> In-Reply-To: <4C866AB3.4030802@lapo.it> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Ports , Stanislav Sedov , Andrew Pantyukhin , Martin Wilke Subject: Re: XPI infrastructure needs some love X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:37:07 -0000 On 09/07/2010 09:39 AM, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Dear port committers, > I understand that infofarmer@ and miwi@ have no more enough free > time to be hyper-active about those and other ports (and btw, thanks > very much for the huge work you did in the past!), but is out there > anyone else out there with both a commit bit and some time on hand to > give a bit of love to the XPI ports? This might be a good time to re-evaluate how we handle those ports in the first place. How many of them involve actual C or C++ code that needs to be compiled to run, vs. simply re-packaging javascript bits? (That's a serious question btw, not a troll.) For those that we are simply repackaging, what's the value in doing that, vs. simply allowing users to download them from mozilla's site? I use quite a few addons for both firefox and thunderbird and the only FreeBSD version I use is enigmail, which (AFAIK) actually does require compilation. Everything else I download, and have never had a problem. Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/