[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Ports working rules
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: Ports working rules
- From: Marc Espie <Marc_(_dot_)_Espie_(_at_)_liafa_(_dot_)_jussieu_(_dot_)_fr>
- Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 18:24:58 +0200
On Mon, Oct 18, 1999 at 03:07:54PM +0200, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
> > From: Marc Espie <Marc_(_dot_)_Espie_(_at_)_liafa_(_dot_)_jussieu_(_dot_)_fr>
> > - NO NEW PORTS UNTIL *ALL* EXISTING ONES ARE FIXED...
> Would it not be possible to 'retire' the current ports, and only allow into service the ones that
> 'produce at least one package for one architecture'.
The actual point is in fact to get people to fix stuff that exists.
Fixing existing ports mostly means:
- fixing packing-lists,
- finding ways to handle common short-coming of the current port.
`retiring' ports that don't currently build package doesn't solve those
Giving porters extra incentive to solve those problems may help...
Obviously, a few ports aren't ever going to end up as packages... I don't
see a legal way to transform ports of commercial applications such as Maple
into `real' packages.
|anime, sf, juggling, unicycle, acrobatics, comics...
|AmigaOS, OpenBSD, C++, perl, Icon, PostScript...
| `real programmers don't die, they just get out of beta'
Visit your host, monkey.org