Sorry, please accept my apologies and move on :-) I usually just follow this list, but since Doug brought down this path... Doug Barton wrote: > IMO, this argument isn't persuasive. My personal feeling is that before > something new gets added to the base system it needs to have a pretty large > userbase, perhaps even a majority of our users. We have a very good ports > system that exists to provide easy access to "optional" software that isn't > needed by a majority of our users. I haven't seen any reasons why ldap > support doesn't fall into that category. I don't know, but separating things out could both fragment the project and make things progress faster. So, my thought was: How about a "base-ports"? A "base-port" should be a software package entirely maintained by the FreeBSD team but kept outside the base system, and must be under a BSD compatible licence? My list would be, basically what can be disabled in make.conf, and some new ones: GAMES, LPR, NIS, SENDMAIL, BIND, DCHP (server), LDAP Please don't flame me - I know that such a list would be eternally disputed... Cheers, Erik -- Ph: +34.666334818 web: http://www.locolomo.org X.509 Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/8D03551FFCE04F0C.crt Key ID: 69:79:B8:2C:E3:8F:E7:BE:5D:C3:C3:B1:74:62:B8:3F:9F:1F:69:B9
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:58 UTC