Re: READMEs files for ports

On Sun, May 01, 2022 at 09:43:28PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> You guys got to remember those are mostly written by developers.
>
> There's a bit of a chicken&egg problem: when you've been playing with
> software for a while, it's difficult to figure out what might be a problem
> for newcomers.
>
> That said READMEs files should reflect stuff that's a good idea to do if
> you're using that package PREFERABLY IN A VERY TERSE MANNER.
>
> If you are using packages YOU CAN HELP.
>
> Yeah.
>
> What do you think is hard to figure out and could use a mention in a
> pkg-readme ?
>
> Bear in mind that we're mostly talking OpenBSD specific related stuff.
>
> But personally, I don't mind a quickstart on "unfriendly" opensource
> that's hard to get to work without looking at their docs.
>
> THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY PEOPLE!!!
>
> You are using OpenBSD and you thing it's difficult to contribute ?
>
> Maybe you can share your experiences about making things work and what was
> hard to figure out ?
>
> (Side note: pkg land is very tricky to automate. Some of what you're going to
> say I'm probably already aware of, but nevertheless this might give an idea
> about priorities on what to work on first)
>

dovecot readme says that "various" things need to be increased to make
it work. No explanation how to do that.
I have a page bookmarked that I have used in the past to be able to do
those things in a new installation.
I'm clueless about the right numbers. I just guess.

postgresql-server seriously needs the defaults and the readme numbers
changed. On a small server popping out 300 image file paths, I got
terrible errors under mod_perl in the past.
For many applications, the low numbers of connections are just fine.
But any web server application needs far more.
Some advice on what are good numbers for different situations would be
a great help.

I would love to help with those two, but I genuinely don't know the
right answers beyond "I did this and it works".

--
Chris Bennett