From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 21 21:43:15 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07078106564A; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 21:43:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yanegomi@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gg0-f182.google.com (mail-gg0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 769028FC08; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 21:43:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggnk4 with SMTP id k4so336888ggn.13 for ; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:43:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=9FJtyoT8dYcmbEbjJqdfSwEaw/GtdROAO1HIGoIiCdA=; b=blypZvbF7AuogIFLrQtD3MMh8fwj3Nv/YGd0SzvBIGPAd8tUfDZuXKOJen19FLGAfN UfLGZ28oYr7O+3SChfHAWJX90kio3ZOxriDs9Tf4EQNwlZZ30WakCwVr3oM9s/uRAzNP riOO/q8hjGzrvrSRFS0LeuTE97QgD1ptB8Y3p33neQIW8F6DdmzgHJ6femrx8aW4QVA5 zP1b+yygxuryL2pXlEvSY9qYjb4VLLXne2WTYm+wiMpGRaM5BpBWo75KxzoZ8SFKEMoO sVP4o07AcQE5lW6mT9Vk87VGFhj/KuNas5c5tQ89Ap5ceRA6TvTPGIL2nhOlIII8JG7A AaAg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.2.134 with SMTP id 6mr14004052oeu.62.1345585393368; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.142.201 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:43:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5033EC58.3000801@FreeBSD.org> References: <20120820194313.GC23607@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120821132643.GE37262@felucia.tataz.chchile.org> <20120821134623.GH5044@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5033D0C0.4030805@FreeBSD.org> <20120821190500.GA46595@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5033E39C.3060700@FreeBSD.org> <20120821194208.GC46595@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5033E6BA.8080309@FreeBSD.org> <5033EC58.3000801@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 14:43:13 -0700 Message-ID: From: Garrett Cooper To: Doug Barton Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Baptiste Daroussin , current@freebsd.org, Warner Losh Subject: Re: pkgng 1.0 release schedule, and HEAD switch to pkgng by default schedule X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 21:43:15 -0000 On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > On 8/21/2012 1:08 PM, Warner Losh wrote: >> >> On Aug 21, 2012, at 1:51 PM, Doug Barton wrote: >> >>> On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>>>> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >>>>>> 1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in >>>>>> current to be able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE >>>>> >>>>> I think it would fit better with historic precedents to make >>>>> pkg optional (but default on) in 10, and mandatory in 11. As >>>>> stated before, I'm fine with removing pkg_* tools from 10 if >>>>> there is robust support for them in the ports tree. >>>>> >>>>> I know you're excited about this project, but let's not lose >>>>> sight of how big a change this is, and how important ports are >>>>> to the project. >>>>> >>>> That was what "if it fits the schedule" was about. >>> >>> I think what I'm trying to say, ever so politely, is that what >>> you're suggesting isn't even an option, so it shouldn't be >>> discussed. >> >> If you are fine with removing them if there's robust support, how can >> you also be suggesting that it is impossible and shouldn't be talked >> about? > > Those address different parts of the problem. Making pkg mandatory in 10 > is different from where the old pkg_* tools end up. The command line > tools are just the tip of the iceberg, there are a lot of interactions > behind the scenes. > >> Personally, I think we should handle this the same way that other >> replacement tools have been done, which is close to what Baptiste has >> proposed. If the new tools are totally awesome, we have replaced old >> tools. > > I don't think we have ever done a complete replacement of major > infrastructure in one release. The traditional model has been to > deprecate in one release, remove in the next. > > And in this case, it doesn't matter how awesome the new tools are, they > are a MAJOR paradigm shift for how users interact with ports, and we are > going to have a lot of users who take years to transition their > installed base. No matter how much we may want to move fast on this, it > just isn't going to be possible. What Doug mentioned (and I don't think was really considered, but is valid) would break people that use pkg_* outside of ports. I know of at least two instances where this would be the case (one case that uses pkg_* directly, and another case that uses libpkg from pkg_* 0-o...). I know it's delaying the inevitable (pkg_* is going to go away), but we shouldn't count our chickens before they've hatched as far as how pkgng needs to be used and how things might change. The optional in 8/9/10, mandatory in 11 proposal seems very sane and it allows people to get things worked out properly without too many headaches. Thanks! -Garrett