Date: Sat, 02 Aug 1997 11:32:38 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: David Nugent <davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au> Cc: 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: <15386.870546758@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 03 Aug 1997 03:20:12 %2B1000." <199708021720.DAA00921@labs.usn.blaze.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I have seen in the FreeBSD project since my involvement. I can count the > number of such incidents I've witnessed in the last couple of years on one > hand, so it's not like the project is infested with stupidity. It was > very ill-considered, and Satoshi's position here is critical. That he > apparently got no say in this is incredible, to say the least. It seems > obvious to an outsider that there are some very fundamental communication > problems within the core team. Seeing this fixed is even more critical > than where tcl or perl happen to reside. 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 a whole "should FreeBSD have everything unbundled, from the compilers to perl, or should it bundle all the high level tools so that other system tools can be written which depend on them?" sort of fracas. One man's useful tool is another man's wasteful, unnecessary bloat, it seems, and rather than see an anti-bloatist campaign which would have led to the removal of tcl, perl, xntpd, tn3270 and a host of other utilities which are currently not deemed "essential" by the anti-bloatists, I think it was sort of deemed the lesser of two evils to just let the bloatists win the TCL debate. At least that's how I see it from my perspective - frankly, after the debate in question was over (which, again, most people here were spared), I decided I didn't even want to think about the issue for awhile and that's why I've been silent in the face of Satoshi's impassioned pleas - I don't want to go back to the bargaining table and have to decide which utilities will get the axe. Once you start with TCL, it will *not* stop there - I can only assure you of that. Perl will follow immediately behind, as will much other stuff (yes perl fans, there are many out there who consider your favorite utility language an evil, bloated monster which should not be bundled with FreeBSD at all). What we have now is a rough state of equilibrium between the two sides (who are fundamentally at odds as to what constitutes a reasonable bundling policy) and while TCL may be causing some grief, I think the bloatists are content with that state of affairs and nothing else is on the bundling horizon that I can see. Nuke TCL and you will swing the balance in the other direction, with a lot more than just TCL biting the dust as a result. Maybe that's not such a bad thing, but just so you understand how much of a "linchpin" issue this one is. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15386.870546758>