From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 3 19:20:24 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5653D16A468 for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:20:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.178]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C7A013C45D for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:20:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id u77so7382330pyb for ; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 11:20:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ezZAyXMk+dNO5RMmzxJ0wwW7+fcPBDrrEZFz2SZHeaw=; b=uyMBqmZYIQ55wmg40hVBXL8HNoCVefOYtakZefnoMx5nPBvliwxK6gEc0E95fAhJ+1RJeQW2nOYVYIxSFELZHxFxRY/nUYnCJVKUV+Zsganq9VdeIimV1jwHinQY6eeAtLdtKVqnxLNMnERBeFEm8dSC/ce5DskRbQBLW8jtuAk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:openpgp:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=w3TFwTO3Oq8RXiulhS+Tgc9BGgZW8hQNZuemioDexhOrbUU1bgR6R5j+GpNHpTvhPc0RbP4JvKf3gkXkVmflaCDPG0tUUTpGL5G+A2OS1P5+flqouPP02FtdyEnXd9wn3KEKnOCqmp7p1C9VNTyvekyzlmn5c1BM3IOlkwkmlE4= Received: by 10.65.155.19 with SMTP id h19mr16963716qbo.1196709618702; Mon, 03 Dec 2007 11:20:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.2.2? ( [67.85.89.184]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f15sm7342440qba.2007.12.03.11.20.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 03 Dec 2007 11:20:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <475456F0.5010004@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:20:16 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071129) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Schmehl References: <200712030308.32301.david@vizion2000.net> <3BC04A18-86CD-4A93-831A-691EBD8D4A43@FreeBSD.org> <47543109.3050303@gmail.com> <75F291E2E8B0639EEEC0F3A2@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <47545092.6080309@gmail.com> <01EE92482FB617CC1FC0D7EC@utd59514.utdallas.edu> In-Reply-To: <01EE92482FB617CC1FC0D7EC@utd59514.utdallas.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 OpenPGP: url= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:20:24 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On Monday, December 03, 2007 13:53:06 -0500 "Aryeh M. Friedman" > wrote: >> >> Have you ever attempted to install the individual ports of a mega >> metaport? >>> > Of course I have. And I haven't run into any problems that weren't > solvable. Try this as a challenge then install xdm cleanly on the first try without having to install any additional ports from the command line (what it drags in is fine) > >>> Before you waste any more time, why don't you get very specific >>> about what you think the "bad state" of the ports system is. >>> "I don't like it" doesn't qualify nor does "ports freezes >>> suck". >> >> I never asked or said any of those... the original thread was >> started when I asked how long the port freeze would last... >> others turned it into a referendum on the ports system... once >> the thread had been transformed I ventured some of my own ideas. >>> > The "bad state" quote is directly from you. Since you made the > statement, I simply asked for some concrete examples of what you > think "bad state" means. You used the term. Surely you have some > idea what you meant by it? Bad state need not equal not fixable under the current system or it may mean that... there is not enough evidence one way or the other to support any public conclusion yet (I have my own see below) >> >> I have 4 ports awaiting inclusion in the ports tree after the >> freeze is over (I am willing to wait but I think the fact that >> there was a ports freeze in the first place points to some >> underlaying flaws which I cited in the original thread) >>> > What would those flaws be? You have a system that is entirely > volunteer. Expecting the same performance that you get from a paid > system is unrealistic. Sometimes maintainers are very busy and > can't commit changes as rapidly as others would like. The > solution? Submit your own patches to the port and they will most > likely get approved. Sometimes committers are very busy and can't > get to your port right away. The solution? Ask a different > committer to take a look. Or become a committer yourself. Actually for the most part I find the all volunteer system works quiet well but it does have some weaknesses that normal commercial development does not have (see my blog for details) and ideal world would be allowing money to be in the mix while keeping the source open. > > Short of hiring professionals to do this work on a fulltime basis, > what would you propose that would improve the system? > > According to your sig you're a developer, so I'm certain you > understand what library incompatibilities are. Given that, how > would you propose to not freeze ports while the base system is > being prepared for release? I have several possible solutions (contact me privately if you want more detail) but am purposely not stating them publically so as not to taint the survey any more then it needs to be. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHVFbw358R5LPuPvsRAiQvAJ9QuOpWtq0pQk7Ke2kjq6jLxeOOTgCcD9PP Fvyoc7oDHuNq0kbcoDcsRb0= =oIvz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----