Balance of portability and maintenance burden (Re: default init on non-Linux platforms)
Hey Adrian,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> writes:
> That's correct. However, the problem with kFreeBSD is that I - as a
> package maintainer - have to invest extra time to make sure my
> packages don't FTBFS on these architectures as otherwise my packages
> wouldn't be allowed to migrate to testing. Time which I rather invest
> into more important packaging work.
If you are that concerned about the maintenance burden, I am happy to
say OpenRC packagers are willing to help in this situation for any
OpenRC related issues. Just bug us.
On kFreeBSD, IMHO, diversity is quite a good thing, even from a packager
maintainer PoV. Making your package portable in the correct way (say,
not temperary conditional block hacks) is generally good for its
rubostness. Implicit assumptions to a single environment ease our tasks
in the short run, but accumulate and exploit the health of the package
in the long run.
Cheers,
Benda
Reply to: