Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 14:09:32 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued) Message-ID: <3828.870642572@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 03 Aug 1997 21:47:48 %2B0200." <19970803214748.48500@klemm.gtn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> But here we speak of a tool that doesnīt necessarily belong > into the basic system and could be put into the ports collection > like all the others tcl / tk versions, that arenīt backward > compatible to each other. I think you're missing my fundamental point. Whether TCL goes or stays is IRRELEVANT in the long run. We could take it out right now and that would solve the short-term crisis, no doubt making you happy again in the bargain, but we'd still be on the wrong road. As the old saying goes, those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it, and we've been here before. We'll be here again, too. I repeat: TCL is just the tip of the iceberg, and -current hasn't even BEGUN to change at the rate which I forsee for the next year. I don't think there's any way that you or I can predict the effects on the ports collection, but with 1000+ ports I think it's safe to say that such effects will not be trivial or minor. Entropy will increase - it's a physical law of software. And that's really the last thing I have to say about this. The issue of TCL is in David's hands now since we've reached the kind of impasse that the Principle Architect was empowered to solve. Whatever his decision is, I'll respect it. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3828.870642572>