x86_64 10.5/i386 fink 10.6 and the options for MacPorts

[Jack Howarth]

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 10:07:53AM +0200, Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>
>>> I guess that's what you get from upgrading on yearly rather than  
>>> weekly basis.
>>
>> Yes, we must must must release new versions more frequently. :-/
>
> Actually I meant *me* upgrading my packages, and it's just fine :-)
>
> The MacPorts release doesn't include any release version of ports
> anyway, just a archive snapshot of the current tree which might or
> might not work. So even if "base" isn't seeing new versions often,
> you are still releasing new "ports" (i.e. tree) on an hourly basis...
>
> I would actually prefer a little less often, like a "stable" branch.
> But I know MacPorts doesn't have the resources nor the interest to
> do that, so I just upgrade less often instead. Like this old Tigger,
> which isn't really supported anymore now that Snow Leopard is out ?
>
> But I was mostly using MP for GTK+ anyway, can get that elsewhere.
>
> --anders
>
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev

How active is the development branch? I ask the svn didn't seem to
be that different from the current 1.8.0 release (which I assume
is very recent). Also I am rather confused by the priority assignments
on tickets here. Why are tickets like 20838 marked as normal priority
instead of high? In fink, not having at least one of our gcc4x packages
build on the latest MacOS X release would be considered a higher
priority bug than normal. What level of breakage is required for
the higher levels?
                Jack
ps I added a new ticket (21341) for proposed fixed gcc44 packaging 
since 20838 was getting a bit cluttered.