The ports collection has some serious issues

[RW]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 19:42:07 -0700
Janky Jay, III wrote:

> Hello scratch,
> 
> On 12/11/2016 03:35 PM, scratch65535 at att.net wrote:
> > I have to admit that I avoid ports if at all possible because
> > I've hardly ever been able to do a build that ran to completion. 
> > There's always some piece of code that's missing and can't be
> > found, or is the wrong version, et lengthy cetera.   I've never
> > done release engineering, but I honestly can't imagine how some
> > of the stuff that makes its way into the ports tree ever got past
> > QA.  It would get someone sacked if it happened in industry.
> > 
> > If the dev schedule would SLOW DOWN and the commitment switched
> > to quality from the current emphasis on frequency, with separate
> > trees for alpha-, beta-, and real release-quality, fully-vetted
> > code, the ports system might become usable again.  
> 
> 	This very, VERY rarely happens to me and I use ports *ONLY* in
> production environments.

I have a desktop with a lot of server ports installed on it and find
that the build problems I have are overwhelmingly desktop related. 

Even on the desktop I don't find it to be more than an irritation.