[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
New policy for ports and packages
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: New policy for ports and packages
- From: Christopher Turan <turans_(_at_)_umich_(_dot_)_edu>
- Date: Mon, 25 Oct 1999 19:14:06 -0400
I will be unlocking the ports tree shortly. Before I do that, I want to
make the new policy for the ports tree clear.
Ports and packages are now tied together. The ports tree is meant to build
both ports and packages. Not just one of them. When you commit new
ports or update old ones, you will test the package along with the port.
Since I know people will not do this, there will have to be punishment.
If you commit without obviously testing both the port and the package,
you get a strike. Three strikes, your account gets turned off.
Large portions of the ports tree are broken because people did not test
the packages or ports well enough. This is going to change.
In an ideal circumstance, I would like the ports-current, immediately
after a release, to track src-current in a controlled manner. Due to
the broken ports in 2.6, this is obviously not going to happen.
When I unlock the trees, I want _ALL_ ports people to use the 2.6
release in src. Do not bother building anything in ports unless
you are running 2.6. I will hold this until I am satisfied all the
missing 2.6 stuff is fixed. Then I will switch the ports tree away
from tracking 2.6.
When we switch away, I will tell you what to switch too. It will mostly
likely be a specific snapshot. I imagine we will be hopping from snapshot
to snapshot, as we progress to the next release. I will finalize plans
at a later date. Further details will be given at that time.
I also do not want private lists to be used anymore. No more
ports-admin_(_at_)__(_dot_)_ If you have a patch that you want tested by a specfic
set of developers, you many send it to them. However, all broadcasts
of the form "please test this. I need feedback." should go to ports_(_at_)__(_dot_)_
OpenBSD does its development in the open. There is no core here.
Also, I understand that ports break very easily. I will not hold it
against you if your port breaks in the future. I will simply mark them
as broken and either fix it myself or move on. However, when you do
update a broken port, I want you to do it correctly. I want the
emphesis to move away from reducing the number of ports that are marked
broken to making sure that unbroken ports work. If there is a relativly
unused port that is marked broken and you don't have the time to fix it,
leave it. Do not do shoddy work. If I see you fuck up, I will give you
Developers, when you commit. I want your commits to change only one
thing at a time. Do not mix your changes together. I will be reviewing
all commits that go into the ports tree. Do not forget peer review.
We have seemed to have moved away from that. You don't have to ask for
peer review if there is something really trivial. If your commit breaks
something and you didn't ask for peer review, I will yell at you.
The ports people do not communicate very well. This is going to change.
Ports tree will most likely be unlocked sometime tonight after I am
sure everyone has read these policies.