Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 23:23:09 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcl -- what's going on here. Message-ID: <199606190523.XAA04861@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <480.835157755@critter.tfs.com> References: <199606190353.NAA28433@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> <480.835157755@critter.tfs.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> What's going on here is that I'm forcing the issue. Bullying people around isn't the best way to get things done. It does do a good job of getting people angry though. (See RMS's recent attempt to bully folks around in gnu.misc.discuss). > (In this entire thread, remember that it holds true for all of > src/gnu, vi, and anyother major third-party/contrib component. !) And I disagreed with it then, and still do. > No I don't think it is optimal to import the uuencoded tarball, but > it sure as hell beats importing the tree. > > Why ? > > 1. People will have to make their changes as patches this way. CVS does that for us. Having 'patches' doesn't buy us anything when it's a critical portion of the tree. > 2. It makes communication with the author(s) easier that we know what > our changes actually are. When a person sends diffs, either the author accepts them or he doesn't. TCL changes *radically* from stable version to version, so importing it via a vendor branch makes it *much* easier to see vs. having to go find out by where in the patch fits. > 3. It makes it easier for people to experiment with a never version > on their own. Ports already allows for this. > 4. It takes up LESS space. BS. The *first* version takes up less space, but for every version afterwards it takes up *incredibly* more space. Every new import effectively doubles the space, since there is probably < 10% overlap in a uuencoded gzip file. > 5. It makes Makefiles easier to make. ? If it makes you feel better, build an empty subdir and stick everything below it. You have to untar the file anyway, so have it 'pre-untarred' in the format the Makefile would have it be in. This is a straw-man. > The discussion ? well, I have tried to start it several times, and > nobody seemed to care, so they obviously cannot feel too much about it > ? BS. I've argued against through email and in personal conversation. But Jordan agreed so it didn't matter. > I hope Peter will import the new GCC the same way, nomatter what we > decide to do with the tarballs. I certainly *hope* not, and given his complaints I would think he knows better than to. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606190523.XAA04861>