On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 08:52:48AM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Chris Bennett <cpb_po...@bennettconstruction.us> wrote: > > > Except that others are requesting this be ported into OpenBSD for years. > > This is accounting software. It needs to be thoroughly tested or > > companies may fail. SMB stands for small to medium sized businesses. > > The "No warranty" clauses on so much open source software isn't a joke. > > It is completely serious. Beyond "best effort" noone is responsible if > companies run software where they didn't fully assess their BoM and as a > result get damaged by what they don't know. The failure mode you describe > is NOT OUR PROBLEM. Beyond best effort, that is. > > > I have a big proposal. It would require some tough rules to avoid being > > a disaster tree. But it would leave these ports visible. > > You have a really big mouth. Why don't you have hard working hands to > match? It might be surprising, but the usual way of handling defective > software is to FIX IT, rather than writing more hand-wringing text about it > which noone will read. >
Have you looked at my p5-PGObject* ports I submitted? Probably not. They all worked. One required a modification to postgresql.port.mk done by someone else who had the knowledge to do this. Then those ports worked perfectly. Another one of those required asking upstream to modify that port on CPAN. They did that after my request, and then that port worked fine. One reviewer pointed out problems, and also gave a single OK to several of my submitted ports. One person actually told me a required port by the project was silly and I shouldn't submit such ports. I thought that the whole point of requiring TWO OK's was to do an excellent job of seeking problems that the port submitter missed. I quietly asked privately several people if perhaps my work was blacklisted. They assured me that that was not the case. Your response seems to be exactly the opposite. Do I really have to do what I was forced to do a long time ago? Submit ports off the list for an OK. Add the approved ones to a non-OpenBSD repository. Then tell people that sure, LedgerSMB is available for OpenBSD, but I had to secretly get approvals? Please stop acting like a bully. You requested in the past that I never ever send you a private email. I have honored that request. So I now request something. Please leave me alone. Let me work. Nobody is required to ever examine my work. But I will submit it anyway. Filter me off the list as you threatened me before. I can submit off-list. Someone requested to keep replies on the list. This is the sort of reply to me that prevents that from happening. Many people reply to me off-list from both ports and especially misc. They request privacy because they also hate this type of mean replies. A couple of years ago, a user of LedgerSMB donated small amount to people helping out. That bought me a much needed piece of hardware sitting next to my laptop. People want to have this. Why are you working against me trying to accomplish it? Why? Thank you for starting OpenBSD and making a wonderful OS. That's why I'm here. -- Puzzled, Chris Bennett
