On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 03:56:35AM +0200, frantisek holop wrote: > hi there, > > are there any ports that get their source from a revision control > system?
as few as possible. > what is the official stance on these? try to get the idiots upstream to eat their shit and make actual release. It's sheer nonsense to have distributors have to deal with all the quality control for piss-poor software releases. All the arguments from the guys from ffmpeg about speed and whatnot are just sorry excuses for only wanting to deal with the fun parts and offload everything else to it. Feel free to write to them... every little insult counts ;-) > unfortunately some projects do not offer packaged sources for > one reason or another... Only bad reasons. In the worst cases, we do the snapshots ourselves and distribute proper tarballs. Each of those stupid projects account for an inordinate amount of time figuring things out, like all those idiots out there including their own copy of ffmpeg (replace with sqlite, autoconf'd shit, and whatnot). Each and every time, you get to have fun figuring infrastructure details, or to fix the same bug again and again, instead of doing real useful work. (still pissed at losing a few hours figuring out that the sqlite bundled with sqlitebrowser was broken, and that they use internal functions, so that unbundling it and switching to the system one took more time). (still pissed off at the mplayer guys who can't even write correct assembler most of the time and blame it on older compilers) (still pissed off at the FSF not releasing new autoconf for YEARS, which results in having mutant versions of autoconf 2.13 all over the place).
