results of ports re-engineering survey

Aryeh M. Friedman aryeh.friedman at
Thu Dec 13 10:47:26 PST 2007

Hash: SHA1

Ade Lovett wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2007, at 02:32 , David Southwell wrote:
>> I suspect antagonistic responsesfrom some people are more about
>> wounded pride (i.e - astonishment why should anyone propose to
>> improve on the procedures, systems and engineering to which they
>> contributed in the past!)
> You suspect wrong.  Sorry.  Indeed, I already said as much about
> the current system, and it's scalability.
>> Sp please either make contributions that are intended to help the
>>  current process rather than boring everyone with negativity
> Since this is a WIP, how about taking it to a specific mailing list
>  that is not related to how things currently operate.   I read
> ports@ for one reason, and one reason only, to keep abreast of
> potential issues with the *current* system.
> It's not hard to set up a mailing list.  Hell, I'll even host it
> myself if that's what it takes, but as things stand, ports@ (or,
> indeed, any other exising mailing list) is not the right place to
> be discussing concepts that are, fluid.

As soon we get to the point where user input is less important
(design, implementation and testing) it will move to it's own virtual
discussion space, but as long as user input is a critical component of
the work it will stay on -ports at .... as several people have said this
is the most appropriate place in the existing structure to do this.

Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list