svn commit: r382341 - in head/lang: gcc46 gcc47 gcc48 gcc49 gcc5

[Bryan Drewery]

On 3/26/2015 3:50 PM, John Marino wrote:
> On 3/26/2015 21:46, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> On 3/26/2015 3:36 PM, John Marino wrote:
>>> Author: marino
>>> Date: Thu Mar 26 20:36:04 2015
>>> New Revision: 382341
>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/382341
>>> QAT: https://qat.redports.org/buildarchive/r382341/
>>>
>>> Log:
>>>   lang/gcc(46,47,48,49,5): Use OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_DragonFly to block JAVA
>>>   
>>>   The JAVA frontend doesn't build on DragonFly on any release.  The new
>>>   OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_${OPSYS} feature is a nice way to avoid the use of
>>>   Makefile.DragonFly (most are in dports, but one is in lang/gcc5).
>>>   
>>>   The recent addition of CXXFLAGS to lang/gcc5 prevents Makefile.DragonFly
>>>   on lang/gcc5 from being removed outright.  There are a couple of options
>>>   available to allow its removal, but I'll need to discuss with Gerald.
>>>   
>>>   Approved by:	DragonFly blanket
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why do you ignore all feedback? I find this as grounds for removal of
>> commit bit.
>>
>> Why do DragonFly hacks belong in FreeBSD Ports? Not even DragonFly uses
>> FreeBSD Ports, it uses dports. So why can these hacks not be in dports?
> 
> Please take these threats offline.
> Your "feedback" directly conflicts with permission I've been given.

No it absolutely does not. _Bapt_ gave you permission to do DragonFly
cleanups yes. This is not a blank approval to whatever you want. I've
voiced much feedback over the past few days (as well as amdmi3) that you
have completely ignored while hiding behind 'bapt approved it'. That is
not how this community works.

I have voiced objections to DragonFly-specific hacks since day 1.

When I approved OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_OPSYS this morning I specifically
objected to committing OPTIONS_EXCLUDE_DragonFly to the tree. It is a
useful feature nonetheless.

I also asked you to try to be less dragonfly-specific this morning. I
too am portmgr. Bapt's year+ old blanket approval does not mean you get
to ignore all new feedback.

> If you want to kick me out as I'm coming up on 2000 commits, that
> majority which have been directly beneficial to FreeBSD, then discuss it
> with portmgr and do what you must.
> 

I really don't care if you have 900000 commits. You must follow the
basic community rules of responding to feedback and listening to others.
You constantly ignore others.

> John
> 

Bryan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-ports-head/attachments/20150326/444efe29/attachment.sig>