From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 12 17:40:15 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A99D5FB
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:40:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12BD1D46
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:40:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <lists@opsec.eu>) id 1YAiyM-0004Ot-33
 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:40:14 +0100
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:40:14 +0100
From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu>
To: ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: BIND REPLACE_BASE option
Message-ID: <20150112174014.GF44537@home.opsec.eu>
References: <CAG=rPVcTsT2izsmdGMJtD6RgRJ3CwfZg1vN6nC+vRMYEQ8iPhA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150112122652.GA9472@lonesome.com> <54B3BE2C.6030207@sorbs.net>
 <20150112123241.GB9472@lonesome.com> <54B3C28C.10605@sorbs.net>
 <20150112130804.GD44537@home.opsec.eu>
 <CA+E3k92LJPRNA-pj_5EkheMogWitpCfgaUi==KsfAz=gZMu5jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <fe6efb4ec026964fb08d50ada48957a5@ultimatedns.net>
 <CA+E3k92wtj_584PvgjLmHXCyYPLX9+95SkC8fdfHK+ZR0sdybg@mail.gmail.com>
 <9132c8812ccd3906dd487830a912d00c@ultimatedns.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <9132c8812ccd3906dd487830a912d00c@ultimatedns.net>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:40:15 -0000

Hi!

> Honestly; why did pkg(8) have to be *required*?

Because those that are really active in maintaining it had the choice of
either

- keeping the old system running, and breaking down on the burden of doing so 

or

- migrating to the pkgng setup which allows to cope with the rate of
  change in the non-freebsd-base software world

It's an economics question: Those players in the open-source OS market
that have the resources to keep going will stay afloat.

FreeBSD had the choice to loose more active maintainers trying to
keep the old state or attract new ones with the new state. It's a
gamble, and if enough people like the old style more, they probably
have to fork.

I've used both styles for a while and yes, the switchover takes
time and patience, but it's not the end-of-the-world.

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         5 years to go !