Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 21:57:16 -0600 (MDT) From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: David Nugent <davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au>, Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>, asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami), andreas@klemm.gtn.com, ports@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org, stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued Message-ID: <199708040357.VAA26238@rocky.mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <15386.870546758@time.cdrom.com> References: <199708021720.DAA00921@labs.usn.blaze.net.au> <15386.870546758@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> What most people here don't understand is that there was very fierce > debate about this behind the scenes for some time before it was done, > and what started as a TCL debate blew up into .. Blew up into 'TCL belongs as much as PERL in the base system, and utilities are being written and will be in the tree in the next couple of months which are being asked for.' revision 1.1 date: 1996/06/26 17:48:13; author: phk; state: Exp; Bmaked tcl 7.5 Hmm, it's August (well over a year later), and there are still *NO* programs that use TCL in the base distribution. The big arguement moved into 'should FreeBSD be more modularized', but the anti-bloatist asceded that as long as programs in the base distribution used PERL/TCL/libdialog/etc..., then they should be part of the base system, otherwise they belong outside. TCL should go, and PERL should go *WHEN* those programs in the base distribution are not considered part of the base distribution or are re-written to not use PERL. TCL has no part in the base distribution, and I've heard 'the programs which will use it will be here 'Real Soon Now' for 14 months now. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708040357.VAA26238>