ports missing their packages.

[Remko Lodder]

On Wed, October 29, 2008 9:09 am, FBSD1 wrote:
> It's my understanding that a port maintainer has to install the port for
> real any time a change is made to the port make files or a update to the
> source of the software to test and verify the changes work as wanted.
> Creating the package after this is just one command and a ftp upload to
> the
> package server. Why are maintainers being given approval to apply their
> changes without creating the required package? This is just lax management
> on the part of the people who do the authorizing of the changes. Missing
> packages increases user frustration level and makes FreeBSD look like its
> being mis-managed.
>
> An alternate solution to this problem is to allow users to upload missing
> packages to the package server direct or to a staging ftp server so
> port/pkg
> management staff can review first and them populate the production package
> server.
>

There is a certain guideline in place which committers follow. If you have
constructive feedback surely someone will listen to it. Spitting your
frustration is not likely to help. Do note that we have a lot of
maintainers which try to satify each and everyone of us, sending messages
like this is not going to help *you*.

I would have a strong opinion -against- people uploading towarsd the FTP
server directly. That will not be done. <period>.

To give you a better understanding; We have a ports-cluster which builds
packages and uploads them to the appropriate place on the FTP servers,
sometimes that takes a little to become available, donate more facilities
so that we can do that better. Also note that QAT (a ports tinderbox) runs
periodically to make sure every thing is just fine!

Thanks,
Remko

-- 
/"\   Best regards,                      | remko at FreeBSD.org
\ /   Remko Lodder                       | remko at EFnet
 X    http://www.evilcoder.org/          |
/ \   ASCII Ribbon Campaign              | Against HTML Mail and News