Re: git: 690a4c91c944 - main - sysutils/bsdebfetch: + Simple system info tool in bash

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 2:34 PM Gleb Popov <arrowd@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 3:31 PM Fernando Apesteguía
> <fernando.apesteguia@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Not that I complain, but how many of these do we have now in the ports? :-)
> >
> > neofetch
> > onefetch
> > pfetch
> > screenfetch
> > ufetch
> >
> > How different are they from each other?
> > I talked a submitter out of committing another similar one because as
> > he admitted, it did not add any value in terms of new features
> > whatsoever.
> >
> > Cheers.
>
> But on the other hand, does it hurt? The port is NO_BUILD and NO_ARCH,
> so the added load on our infrastructure is minimal. This also might
> encourage the author to contribute more.

Yes, the port itself is light, for sure. But it might also encourage
people adding "duplicated" or forked ports without any added value.

In this case, the maintainer does not maintain any other ports in the
tree that I could find and I could only find three PR reported by him:

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/buglist.cgi?bug_status=New&bug_status=Open&bug_status=In%20Progress&bug_status=Closed&component=Individual%20Port%28s%29&email1=contact%40shiori.com.br&emailreporter1=1&emailtype1=substring&list_id=525370&product=Ports%20%26%20Packages&query_format=advanced&resolution=---

I do not ask for this to be backed out or anything. I just wanted to
point out that politely asking what this port does that any of the
other *fetch ports don't, is also a valid course of action.

Cheers.