Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:08:17 +0100 From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> To: Mark Russell <freebsd@mark.net.au> Cc: portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: INDEX[-5] files were removed from CVS. Message-ID: <41962361.6050205@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20041114014750.K60099@juana.isp.net.au> References: <20041113101925.GB70256@voodoo.oberon.net> <20041114003532.L60099@juana.isp.net.au> <200411131524.18479.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <20041114012609.B60099@juana.isp.net.au> <41961E2F.20008@gmx.net> <20041114014750.K60099@juana.isp.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Russell wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
>
>> Mark Russell wrote:
>>
>>> I have seen no discussion on it can you point me to the thread in the
>>> lists please
>>
>>
>> It has been discussed on a non-public list. In any case, there's no
>> point in rehashing the discussion now, you can solve your immediate
>> problem by overriding INDEXFILE yourself.
>
>
> So major changes to 2 stable branches have been discussed in non public
> lists and non gives a hoot on the effects on how it effects the general
> userbase?
Ports does not have branches, we do care about the effects on the userbase and
the brokenness from not changing INDEXFILE to some new default value is
accidental (and can be easily worked around for the moment like I already
pointed out). Please, there's no need to make a big fuss over this, nor will
it make any difference if you vent your (probably justfified) frustration here.
--
,_, | Michael Nottebrock | lofi@freebsd.org
(/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve | http://www.freebsd.org
\u/ | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41962361.6050205>