From nobody Sun Feb 18 08:49:21 2024 X-Original-To: ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Tczqv1xbmz5ByXw for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:49:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from www121.sakura.ne.jp (www121.sakura.ne.jp [153.125.133.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Tczqr5HXGz3ynv for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 08:49:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp designates 153.125.133.21 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp; dmarc=none Received: from kalamity.joker.local (123-1-91-49.area1b.commufa.jp [123.1.91.49]) (authenticated bits=0) by www121.sakura.ne.jp (8.17.1/8.17.1/[SAKURA-WEB]/20201212) with ESMTPA id 41I8nLBn091968 for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2024 17:49:22 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2024 17:49:21 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD ports community is broken Message-Id: <20240218174921.a8082649142dd43a469bebfa@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: <7q6ep7m2eee6yqtxftlwkhuwdkssd74vjow55txms7lkokazfu@grrqllhefges> References: <20240218015843.34c5d078@rimwks.local> <7q6ep7m2eee6yqtxftlwkhuwdkssd74vjow55txms7lkokazfu@grrqllhefges> Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; amd64-portbld-freebsd14.0) List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Tczqr5HXGz3ynv X-Spamd-Bar: -- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.69 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.997]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-0.996]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:153.125.133.16/28]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7684, ipnet:153.125.128.0/18, country:JP]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[ports@freebsd.org]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sakura.ne.jp]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[ports@freebsd.org]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[] On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 07:52:00 +0100 Felix Palmen wrote: > * Rozhuk Ivan [20240218 01:58]: > > 1. devel/pkgconf: unconditionally prioritises base system libraries > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=273961 > > Actors: vishwin@freebsd.org and zirias@freebsd.org > > Actually, the discussion in this PR (which was ridiculously long because > of one single person) tells the whole story. > > I guess for anyone completely unwilling to even *try* to understand why > their patches NOT fixing the actual root cause are ugly and potentially > harmful hacks, trying to "contribute" to ports while stubbornly spamming > lots of people with needless arguments and in the end even insulting > people is not a great strategy. I mean, there's always the possibility > to fork a project if you want. > > -- > Felix Palmen {private} felix@palmen-it.de > -- ports committer -- {web} http://palmen-it.de > {pgp public key} http://palmen-it.de/pub.txt > {pgp fingerprint} 6936 13D5 5BBF 4837 B212 3ACC 54AD E006 9879 F231 I "feel" these are came from the differences on backgrounds of each side. Just a FYI. In automotive industry area, once SINGLE defective part is discovered at customer (GM, Chrysler, Forrd, Toyota, VW,...) side, the supplier must immediately proceed "corrective action". Even some ppm of devective parts shipped to customer is considered as "a huge amount of defects". In many case, corrective action is "additional inspection to stop shipping defective parts". And this is not everything to do. Supplier need to investigate the root cause and decide "preventive action" while "corrective action" is active. For persons working on automotive industry, do nothing until preventive action is made is nonsense. We are forced to do corrective action, even if it's very, very, ... ,very ugly "addidional inspection". Moreover, aerospace area is much more stricter than automotive area. Keeping these in mind, the hack you hate is the "corrective action", while fixing root cause you like is the "preventive action". Corrective action is needed for users until preventive action is done. Note that ugly corrective action can be reverted back once preventive action is confirmed OK and done. -- Tomoaki AOKI