On 27.06.2017 15:24, [email protected] wrote:
[Default] On Mon, 26 Jun 2017 19:33:50 +0000, Grzegorz Junka
<[email protected]> wrote:
we could
start small with a just a handful of ports in a stable LTS (Long Term
Support) branch. Develop processes around maintaining them, get some
feedback about the effort of applying only security fixes, then add more
ports as required or as viable from the resources point of view. How
does that sound?
It sounds excellent, at least to me.
How many platform roles are seen as fbsd's metier?
Firewall? Already handled.
Specialist workstations such as sound/video editing? Maybe. I
don't know enough about that to have an opinion.
Servers. No question. That's always been freebsd's best thing.
The number of ports to build a server-of-all-work is not large.
Unnecessarily complex and a source of uncontrolled errors, yes,
but not really *large* qua large.
It really depends. For example only www/gitlab needed 400 ports (!) and
its a while i checked.
Without a defined list of supported software this is only wishing ;)
Greetings,
Torsten
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
