Archives and Packages (was Re: Universal and binary builds)

[Joshua Root]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> 
>>  I could easily see the MacPorts project saying, in some collective
>> consciousness fashion: "Hey, we nearly died and came back to life!  We
>> have a lot more ports than we ever did before, a lot of them even work
>> now, so hey, what the hell do you want, BLOOD?  Go peddle your binary
>> packages somewhere else!  We're busy!"   I can see a whole lot of
>> justification for that point of view, which is why it's always with a
>> sense of unease and mixed feelings that I even get into this whole,
>> stupid packaging discussion from time to time. :-)
> 
> That pretty much happened. Binary packages don't help if the source
> don't work.
> 
> But then it went from there (we're busy), to "MacPorts is a source
> distribution".

"MacPorts is a source distribution" is merely a statement of fact, not
of policy, as far as portmgr is concerned.

My personal response is, "Yes, we know that binaries would be a great
feature to have. Now can we stop talking about it and write code?" :-)

Because in the end, this feature request, like every other, is waiting
on a volunteer to produce a patch.

- Josh