Re: Clang as default compiler November 4th

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 11:27:50AM +0200, Lars Engels wrote:
> At the moment the ports maintainers don't give much about if their ports
> build with CLANG or not because they're not forced to.

I think this is a mis-representation.

Adding the requirement "your ports must work on clang" is adding an
ex-post-facto requirement.  This creates the following matrix of what
we are implicitly asking maintainers to do:

(FreeBSD 7|8|9|10) * (amd64|arm|i386|powerpc|sparc64) * (base gcc|base clang)

It is completely insane to expect anyone to be able to test in all of those
environments, or even a tiny subset of them.  This isn't what most people
sign up for when they sign up to maintain ports.

> Those who don't run CURRENT won't notice, but those who do will have to
> get their butts up and fix the ports

I think it's foolish to assume that maintainres don't have their butts in
gear as it is.  Please note, we have nearly 1300 PRs, hundreds of ports with
build errors and/or PRs, and hundreds that fail on -current only.  I try to
advertise all these things the best I know how.  Adding the hundreds that
fail on -clang only and then blaming the maintainers is simply going to be
counter-productive.

mcl