FreeBSD asking contributors to fix their opinions - is it official?
Christofer C. Bell
christofer.c.bell at gmail.com
Wed Mar 25 14:35:37 UTC 2020
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 9:13 AM Marc Lehmann <schmorp at schmorp.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 01:50:09PM +0000, Ottavio Caruso <
> ottavio2006-usenet2012 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I'm not affiliated to FreeBSD, but I see nothing wrong in a developer
> > from another project posting onto a public mailing list of another
> > project and voicing his concerns about a particular issue
> Me neither - I am merely concerned that the particular issue is an
> unspecified _personal opinion_. I see a lot of wrong in going around and
> asking people to remove personal opinion in the name of a big Project.
> This together with the fact that this ports page:
> is not only full of personal opinion but, much worse, also of made-up
> false claims should give you an idea of where we would be heading if we
> tried to police all that.
> > same time I think you are taking it a bit too personal. I've read 
> > and I see nothing that induces to thinking he was speaking on behalf
> > of the whole of FreeBSD.
> Well, he has since pretty much clarified that he does and that the project
> is fine with that, so my reading seemed to have been spot on.
For what it's worth, I checked out
https://metacpan.org/changes/distribution/Canary-Stability as cited on
https://www.freshports.org/devel/p5-Canary-Stability/ figuring I'd see some
personal opinions. I found a lot of them. I strongly agree with the
adamw at freebsd.org that they don't belong in the port. (Some of the
extraneous "opinions" are citations of fact meant to call attention to your
concern about some issue that isn't germane to the port itself -- I'm
referring to these, as well).
It doesn't really pass the smell test when you claim to not know what he's
Revision history for Perl extension Canary::Stability
2013 Mon Apr 22 12:38:45 CEST 2019
- carbon-dioxide levels hit 400ppm first time in recorded history.
- during AUTOMATED_TESTING, turn minimum version recommendations into
hard requirements to avoid false positives in unsupported perl
- added dummy testsuite.
2012 Sun Sep 25 01:45:56 CEST 2016
- another year where the UNFCCC had to adjust their predictions
in the worse direction.
- do not print the big intro blob in yellow.
2011 Sun Mar 13 04:41:48 CET 2016
- the year the terrorists won and the free world sacrificed the free.
- added more explanatory blurb, based on ideas by Kent Fredric.
- colour wasn't reset in time to catch further Makefile.PL
output in some cases.
2006 Tue Jan 31 01:00:00 UTC 2006
- the year when things were in good shape still.
- the compatibility version test for 5.22 was wrong and errornously
takes 5.20.1+ as unsupported.
- fix urls.
2001 Tue Jul 3 02:18:41 CEST 2001
- the year where perl was still accomodating enough to inspire module
authors to do cool stuff, as opposed to abusing policy to stifle
1996 Wed Jun 5 09:34:41 GFT 1996
- ariane 5 destructed due to a software compatibility problem.
More information about the freebsd-questions