Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 15:05:10 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@math.missouri.edu> Cc: David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: duration of the ports freeze Message-ID: <4751BE76.1020901@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20071201134519.S16007@cauchy.math.missouri.edu> References: <33640.194.74.82.3.1196149681.squirrel@galain.elvandar.org> <200712010948.34363.david@vizion2000.net> <20071201182840.GA35127@owl.midgard.homeip.net> <200712011149.11212.david@vizion2000.net> <20071201134519.S16007@cauchy.math.missouri.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, David Southwell wrote: > >> On Saturday 01 December 2007 10:28:40 Erik Trulsson wrote: >>> Personally, as a user, I have never really been even slightly >>> inconvienced by any of the ports tree freezes. >> >> All I can say is bully for you! The question is how do we get rid >> of a p[roblem even if it is not a disadvantage for you >> personally. It is disappointing when one hears arguments not to >> change simply because one particular individual is not >> disadvantaged by a currently illogical and antiquated solution to >> a problem that will inevitably grow as the number of ports >> increase. >> >> We need to grasp the nettle while we may!! > > I think that you and Aryeh are not getting that it is not just > "bully for you." There is a major effort required to change the > way we do ports. Even if the current system has some imperfections, > you have to persuade the FreeBSD community that the benfits of > fixing things are greater than the costs. I never knew I was advocating a specific solution or any change at all.... my only goal is attempt to systematically look at the current issues and see if a new archicture would be worth the time and effort > > My personal assessment is that now is NOT the time to grap the > nettle. Over time the ports system will acquire more and more > problems, until perhaps in ten or twenty years time it will be > unusable. Then it will be time to fix it, when we have a clearer > picture of what all the problems really are. Or maybe by then > things will have happened that make this whole issue moot. I just > don't think it is worth the effort to fix this problem now, > especially when the benefits will only be to a few power users. Without some short of historical failure/incorrect results data it is impossible to know who is right and who is wrong. But the inability to install mega metaports in pieces is pretty good evidence of a problem for me. > > Look, its good that you feel the freedom to complain, and advocate > for change. But don't get upset when others say they like the > status quo. They need to have freedom to say their piece too. Without a serious look at the pros and cons of any possible change it is impossible to know who is right and who is wrong on this issue. So I think some kind of monitoring of system issues may shed light regardless of the implications of the light. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHUb52358R5LPuPvsRAhhPAJ42bdbR+G/eCQduIwjkO98YMfjHlACg1N98 mFfHOdVc5NZc12tLzCUo/pg= =j3S5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4751BE76.1020901>