cvs commit: ports/net-im/openfire Makefile distinfo pkg-plist ports/net-im/openfire/files patch-build-build.xml

[Peter Jeremy]

On 2011-Jan-11 09:13:02 +0100, Pietro Cerutti <gahr at gahr.ch> wrote:
>I am personally against -devel ports. These tends to get marked as
>IGNORE or anyway no longer be valid after the -devel branch has turned
>to stable.

That's a reasonable approach in some respects.

> I prefer to keep the latest available version in myport/,

As an end user, I expect "category/myport" to be the "recommended"
stable version of the port, with any other "category/myport?*"
variants reflecting older-but-still-wanted or development versions.
Judging by comments and questions I've seen over the years, I'm not
alone in this point of view.

>It is a porter's discretion to ponder wheter a particular release
>version is stable enough to get into the main myport/ directory.

Taking into account users' expectation that the version in myport/ is
suitable for production use.

>In this particular case, openfire-3.7.0.beta seemed to my workable enough.

It may well be - after all, many of us are running 8-stable or
9-current, both of which are "beta" software.  And it could be that
the "beta" designation relates to issues that do not affect the
FreeBSD port.  But, IMHO, by taking this step, you are stating that
openfire-3.7.0.beta is suitable for production use.

-- 
Peter Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/attachments/20110112/bdfd2481/attachment.pgp