ports structure and improvement suggestions

[Paul Schmehl]

Sideris Michael wrote:
> 
> So you are telling me indirectly that the maintainers are bored to dedicate max 10' to
> maintain something that is their responsibility? If this is the case, then give me an 
> address and I will be sending you periodically patches for every port. But we will indeed 
> make a deal. You are going to apply my patches and I will never see any new ports being 
> added without having the OPTIONS framework.
>
I can't speak for other port maintainers, but I am far from bored.  In 
fact I'm so busy that I often wonder why I volunteered to maintain some 
ports.  I also get frustrated when new ports I submit don't get handled 
quickly enough, but then I remember how busy I am, and I figure the 
committers are probably just as busy if not more so.

You get what you pay for.  With volunteers that means you often don't 
get what you consider timely responses because, well, they're very busy 
and this *is* volunteer work.
> 
> I just wanted to say that the fact that I am discussing something or giving a few ideas, 
> doesn't mean I have to implement them also.
>
Sounds just like what a port maintainer or committer might say.  :-)

-- 
Paul Schmehl (pauls at utdallas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5007 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20060508/e6114b7c/smime.bin