Ports completely and permanently hosed

[Erich Dollansky]

Hi,

On 07 August 2009 am 10:14:25 b. f. wrote:
> On 8/7/09, Erich Dollansky <erich at apsara.com.sg> wrote:
> > On 07 August 2009 am 08:44:44 b. f. wrote:
> >> Erich Dollansky wrote:

> >> >If this would be synchronised with the main FreeBSD
> >> > releases, it would have a minor effect on users.
> >>
> >> But please don't attempt to slow needed development by
> >> making *(&@Q%#%@!!!! suggestions like this.  If you need a
> >> seat-belt, put it on -- but don't wrap it around everyone's
> >> neck.
> >
> > So, why is there a ports freeze just before a new release?
> >
> > Isn't it done just out of the same reason?
> >
> > They want to have a stable ports tree on the day of the
> > release.
>
> Yes, and for building a stable subset of packages beforehand to
> ship with the release.  But these freezes are considered to be
> a necessary evil, to be removed as soon as possible, and not
> something that should be in place from release to release. The
> current version of the Ports tree is supposed to be the leading
> edge of (downstream) development.
>
You misunderstand me. I do not want a freeze of the ports tree, I 
only recommend, to either delay an update of a base port to the 
next freeze or put a short freeze around during which only ports 
are updated which got screwed by the change.

If I want a freeze to 'my' ports tree, I keep the one from the 
last release.

Erich