From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 12 16:21:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F3016A4CE; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:21:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 503F443D2D; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:21:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 3B18F5C91C; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:21:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:21:48 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Doug Barton Message-ID: <20040812162148.GM57908@elvis.mu.org> References: <20040812012909.GA25768@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <2CD52765-EC03-11D8-887A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> <20040812030913.GD27338@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <1092287083.796.29.camel@tomcat.kitchenlab.org> <20040812053107.GK57908@elvis.mu.org> <20040812154941.GJ32036@sirius.firepipe.net> <20040812085554.M773@ync.qbhto.arg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040812085554.M773@ync.qbhto.arg> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:47:17 +0000 cc: "Bruce A. Mah" cc: Ken Smith cc: "re@freebsd.org" cc: "cvs-src@freebsd.org" cc: Will Andrews cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" cc: "cvs-all@freebsd.org" cc: Ceri Davies cc: Oliver Eikemeier Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add Makefile add.h extract.c futil.c main.c perform.c pkg_add.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/create Makefile create.h main.c perform.c pkg_create.1 pl.c src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/delete Makefile delete.h main.c perform.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:21:48 -0000 * Doug Barton [040812 09:06] wrote: > > I find this line of reasoning very interesting in light of the > disagreement I'm currently having with eik about repo copying a port I'm > working on. On the one hand, you and he are arguing that it's perfectly > ok to break POLA in -stable because the new stuff is better, and the old > stuff sucked anyway. On the other hand, eik and one other member of the > portmgr team are arguing that an old port's revision history is so > incredibly valuable that it must be preserved, even though it has > little relevance to the new port. I'd find this funny if it weren't so > sad. It's upsetting that the two concerns are: 1) Breaking POLA because somehow someone on the team knows what's better for users, somehow this is OK. 2) Preserving repo history, that the user couldn't give two shits about. I would have made another port, at least for a couple of months. I don't care about the history, as long as you're not taking away a widely used tool (no matter how much it "sucks") and forcing people to upgrade. -- - Alfred Perlstein - Research Engineering Development Inc. - email: bright@mu.org cell: 408-480-4684