| 1 |
On Monday 06 September 2004 21:29, Andrew Gaffney wrote: |
| 2 |
> Mark Rudholm wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Is it just me, or is Portage getting out of date in a lot of areas. |
| 4 |
> > I keep finding that it is months out of date on software that I use. |
| 5 |
> > For example, OpenVPN's latest stable release, v1.6.0 came out on May 9, |
| 6 |
> > yet portage is still at 1.5.0-r1 (masked or not). The 2.0_beta releases |
| 7 |
> > are nowhere to be found. KDE 3.3 is also not masked. Postfix 2.1 took a |
| 8 |
> > while to show up in Portage... |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > I also noticed that the GWN wasn't posted to the Gentoo website last week |
| 11 |
> > (or this). |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Should I be concerned? |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Nope, not at all. Just remember that all of the Gentoo developers are |
| 16 |
> volunteers. They work on this stuff in their spare time. If you want a |
| 17 |
> newer version of a particular program in the portage tree, write an ebuild |
| 18 |
> yourself and submit it via bugs.gentoo.org. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
OK, well, we can skip the OSS primer, I think we all know what the community |
| 21 |
is about and how it works. What I'm concerned about is that Portage seems to |
| 22 |
be slipping, and that not enough people/developers are contributing new |
| 23 |
ebuilds. To draw an analogy, I can vote, but that doesn't really solve the |
| 24 |
problem of low voter turnout. FreeBSD's Ports is also user-maintained and it |
| 25 |
seems far more current. Has something changed? It didn't seem to be so out |
| 26 |
of date before. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-Mark |
Archives