From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Wed Apr 20 09:00:38 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84AEEB1515E for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:00:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from mail.rdsor.ro (mail.rdsor.ro [193.231.238.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C2213A2; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:00:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan_partelly@rdsor.ro) Received: from [192.168.1.155] (unknown [86.125.33.32]) by mail.rdsor.ro (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C5BF1F9A7; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:00:36 +0300 (EEST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) From: Dan Partelly In-Reply-To: <5524F499-5042-407E-9180-43D15A53F3F0@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 12:00:36 +0300 Cc: Julian Elischer , Nathan Whitehorn , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7621BDAB-A409-456A-A3F1-A6CD9B371DBC@rdsor.ro> References: <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> <5716FA70.4080604@freebsd.org> <57170E5D.1090701@freebsd.org> <5524F499-5042-407E-9180-43D15A53F3F0@FreeBSD.org> To: David Chisnall X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 09:00:38 -0000 IMO, the number of packages per-se is not a problem as long as you can = manage them without arcane commands, aliases, pipe - filters, or = scripts. (they all have their place, but less , the better) My point is = that I don't really want to keep on my head a Unix hacker hat. I (and = presumably many other humans ) like simple things,which allow me to type = a short command (preferably the whole system should be simple enough to = be explained in one-two pages in handbook) , wait for completion, and = get on with my life.=20 When I said people should pay more attention to Redmond and Cupertino, = this is what I meant. UIs are important. Easy service management, fault = reporting and so on should be automated. We shouldn't waste our time = doing what the computer should do in the first place. Most people want = to get the job done, so they can proceed with what is important for = them. I am very sorry if this is so offensive to some people that they = feel attacked, but unfortunately there aint much I can do to = alleviate this.=20 >=20 > 1) The number of packages that the base system has. > 2) The user interface by which the packages are presented. >=20 > I believe (and, please, correct me if I=E2=80=99m wrong), that all of = the complaints in this thread have been about the UI, not about the = underlying mechanism. That=E2=80=99s not to say that they=E2=80=99re = unimportant (quite the reverse), but that they can be solved = concurrently with the task of preparing the base system for distribution = in packaged form. >=20