Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 May 2014 02:02:13 +0000
From:      "Montgomery-Smith, Stephen" <stephen@missouri.edu>
To:        Jonathan Chen <jonc@chen.org.nz>, "portmgr-feedback@freebsd.org" <portmgr-feedback@freebsd.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.
Message-ID:  <536EDA23.6090401@missouri.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CAJuc1zOvQAJB81BEThcpGh%2BGn6WbP74LAi3zQ=AWkTn-wCOyhg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <536E46E0.7030906@FreeBSD.org> <CAJuc1zOvQAJB81BEThcpGh%2BGn6WbP74LAi3zQ=AWkTn-wCOyhg@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/10/2014 08:48 PM, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> On 11 May 2014 03:33, Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@freebsd.org> wrote:
> [...]
>> So we will be DEPRECATING and resetting maintainer on all unstaged ports
>> on June 31st.
>>
>> These ports will be set to EXPIRE on August 31st and will then be
>> removed from the tree. They will not be restored unless someone stages
>> them as well.
>=20
> The problem I have with this decision is that there are some complex
> ports which have no single maintainer (case in point: eclipse-devel);
> and whose patch-submitters only occasionally dabble with the port.
> Staging support for these ports sometimes tend to be over-complex, and
> one that yield no immediate benefit to the submitter.
>=20
> And then there are the ports which have their have their home-baked
> installer, where adding staging support could mean wholesale changes
> to the port.
>=20
> It used to be the philosophy of FreeBSD to favour pragmatism over
> ideology. I must admit to some disappointment over this decision to
> force staging as the "one true way".

I have noticed that "make all" now includes the staging as well as
building.  That is to say, it looks like there is a rather wholesale
reordering of how ports build and install.  From this I conclude it is
becoming harder to include the legacy NO_STAGE code, which presumably
must stick to the old way of doing things.

Of course I might be wrong.  But if I am right, then it will become
increasingly difficult to allow unstaged ports.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?536EDA23.6090401>