On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 12:11:06PM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2007 at 05:40:21PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>
> As of kFreeBSD:
> > a. kfreebsd -- easy!
> > i. add it to the archive!
> > - straight after etch release?
> that's the matter of the discussion here, and it's not
> up to the kfreebsd porters, but the ftp-master, who you
> are speaking in the name of if I'm not mistaken. I see
> strong opposition here, which I still do not undertand.
I'm not speaking for anyone else, and this thread should be taken
as challenging (as in "here are some problems I see, please solve
them"), not opposed ("here are the reasons why this shouldn't happen,
go away"). For the record, I'm reasonably persuaded by what I've seen
here, at least to the point where I expect any further problems that
might appear just need to be solved.
> > - update archive qualification page?
> I'm still missing what's really missing from it,
> except a couple of developers which is well not a real
> problem.
I presume stuff's changed in the last year and a bit though; eg GING
doesn't seem to be mentioned.
> > v. piuparts or other automated testing infrastructure?
> Oh that's new, I wasn't aware the official RC arch did
> had such an infrastructure !
These aren't meant to be things you /need/, they're ways of making
kfreebsd really excellent. I'd much rather see new ports aiming to do
things better than existing ones, rather than just trying to match them.
Cheers,
aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature