Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 14:44:58 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Allan Bowhill <abowhill@blarg.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for feedback on a Ports-collection change Message-ID: <p0602044ebc24b29351e4@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <20040109191335.GA91968@kosmos.my.net> References: <p0602041abc1660a416d0@[128.113.24.47]> <20040109191335.GA91968@kosmos.my.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:13 AM -0800 1/9/04, Allan Bowhill wrote: >On 0, Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> wrote: > >You could revise the current system, but from my >perspective, it sounds like another kludge to an >already somewhat overengineered system. Possibly true... >If you are going to make a change this radical, why >not go further than this, and just design an all >around better ports system? Because "just designing a better ports system" is a very major job. I expect to have two or three months at the *most* to design, implement, and install whatever we can come up with. Once my friend has a full-time job, he will have no time to work on this. And I already have no time to work on it, or I wouldn't consider paying him to do it. Those are just the realities of my side of this proposal. On my mind is the fact that the simple change to "get rid of pkg-comment" took more than a month before it was successfully accomplished. It is really easy (IMO) to underestimate how much time it will take to make *any* change which effects the entire ports tree. So, what I'm shooting for is a *doable* project, but one which leaves the ports-tree in a state where it would be easier to do some follow-up projects that would have much more obvious benefits than this step will have. Please understand that I agree completely that we could use much more significant improvements than this proposal provides -- but I'm just trying to pick off a "doable" project. I am also not dismissing alternate ideas, but I do fear that we could spend months trying to pick the most-perfect alternate-idea, and then have no time to implement any actual changes. >So unneccesary scaffolding is useless. Out-of-date >uneccessary scaffolding is time-consuming. I am thinking about the remainder of your comments, but I do not have anything useful to say about them right now... -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0602044ebc24b29351e4>