Limitations of Ports System

[Skip Ford]

Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
> Developing in a vacuum is a recipe for disaster.... we are making
> fairly good progress believe it or not I only see an other 1 or 2
> threads being needed before actual coding starts, *BUT* producing a
> system no one wants is pointless thus it is wise to gather as much
> input as possible...

And that's fine if that's how you prefer to work, but everyone's point is
that it has nothing to do with the current ports system at all so the talk
doesn't belong on a mailing list dedicated to the current ports system.
It's just noise here.  Research for a new system from ports@ users belongs
on a list dedicated to the new system.

> why is it that everyone who sees the whole
> concept as being negative has offered no input what so ever about what
> should be done (even saying "the current system is fine" is useful to us)

You've been told over and over what should be done.  You need a ports-ng
wiki (or whatever you want to call your new system) and/or your own mailing
list.  Posting a single message occasionally on ports@ to point others to
a new system in the works is perfectly fine, but using a mailing list
dedicated to one system to develop another competing system isn't.
If you need research from ports@ readers, you post a message pointing
them elsewhere, you don't do it in a way that floods this list with 100+
messages.

You've been given lots of sound advice on how to proceed and you've
listened to none of it.  You haven't heard what anyone has said thus far.
Just start a wiki already like you've been told to do by those who already
know exactly what they're doing, and aren't still trying to figure out how
to figure out what it is they might want to do someday.

-- 
Skip