David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost> writes: > I don't know what the answer is. Partly it's "the status quo isn't > actually awful so nobody's all that motivated to work on it". Part of the answer is that carrying patches in pkgsrc is mostly the wrong thing. Patches should be filed with upstream, and upstreams should have fixed releases. I realize that doesn't always work, but pkgsrc is not doing well on the first half of the plan. And, if there is a patch from someplace else, that should be a PATCHFILE, not patches/patch-foo. Overall, the effort to address this seems really large compared to how things would be if patches were filed upstream as our documented procedures say they should be.
Description: PGP signature