Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Jul 2012 12:55:15 +0200
From:      Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Cc:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [HEADSUP & CFT] pkg 1.0rc1 and schedule
Message-ID:  <500A8A93.5060008@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <201207131220.56501.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <20120712100110.GA34228@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <201207130826.32942.jhb@freebsd.org> <5000406B.2060201@FreeBSD.org> <201207131220.56501.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 13.07.2012 18:20, schrieb John Baldwin:

> To clarify, you are not being criticized for speaking up, you are being
> criticized for the way in which you are speaking up (an accusatory tone) and
> for blowing off a pointer to a talk that would perhaps answer some of your
> questions.

John,

for lack of testing PKGNG I can't really comment on it on a technical
grounds.

I do need to support Doug in the way he's 'blown off a pointer to a
talk' though, and understand Doug's reluctance in following it.

I, too, would refuse to watch a one hour video if I've asked less than a
handful of concise and specific questions.  Luckily, the answers have
more or less been given in sibling threads.

> Back to my original e-mail: FreeBSD is a big project.  I try to keep a pulse
> on as much of it as I can (mostly by reading/skimming a _lot_ of e-mail each
> day), but even with all that there is a lot going on that I don't know the
> intimate details of.  Instead, I choose to trust my fellow developers to
> best manage the areas over which they have expertise and detailed knowledge
> until given strong evidence to assume otherwise.  My humble suggestion to you
> would be to adopt a similar strategy.

There is one other personal line of thinking I have: if people can't
concisely explain what they're up to, I get suspicious, and I sympathize
with Doug there.

And even though Bapt has made efforts to explain, I can't help but get
the feeling that Doug and Bapt have been talking past each other for a
while.

And I also do not believe that Doug was interested in "this made me
happy" case stories by systems administrators, for neither was I.  While
it's good that we can make some individuals happy, that's a question
quite distinct from the question "will it benefit the project as a whole".

I found the discussion that spun off between Peter Jeremy and Matthew
Seaman rather elucidating, but the one thing I fear is that we no longer
have text-based metadata.

If you've ever used "pver" as a port version comparision tool, you know
how fast the answer "which ports need updating/removal/replacement" can
be even with the classical /var/db/pkg layout.

I personally see that some of the 1.0rc shortcomings are showstoppers,
but then since I've not really been helpful on getting ports in shape
for -CURRENT beyond fixing ports so they could be removed from the
"fails to build on ...." wiki lists, my opinion hasn't much weight
regarding -CURRENT.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?500A8A93.5060008>