From owner-freebsd-ports  Sat Aug  2 12:35:50 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA08331
          for ports-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 12:35:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.scsn.net (scsn.net [206.25.246.12])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA08326;
          Sat, 2 Aug 1997 12:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rhiannon.scsn.net ([208.133.153.148]) by mail.scsn.net
          (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-32322U5000L100S10000)
          with ESMTP id AAA190; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:25:42 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by rhiannon.scsn.net (8.8.6/8.8.5) id PAA01228;
	Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:32:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <19970802153150.47714@scsn.net>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 15:31:50 -0400
From: "Donald J. Maddox" <root@scsn.net>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Cc: dmaddox@scsn.net, David Nugent <davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au>,
        Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>,
        Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>, andreas@klemm.gtn.com,
        ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued
Reply-To: dmaddox@scsn.net
References: <19970802151135.60481@scsn.net> <15692.870549801@time.cdrom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.79
In-Reply-To: <15692.870549801@time.cdrom.com>; from Jordan K. Hubbard on Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 12:23:21PM -0700
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 12:23:21PM -0700, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> >     Most of this argument is just silly.  Even the most vehement anti-
> > bloatists don't consider perl to be "an evil, bloated monster"; they just
> > consider _it's inclusion in the base distribution_ to be AEBM.  While you
> 
> I don't see the difference from the POV of this discussion so this
> paragraph of yours doesn't really parse for me.

Huh?

> 
> >     In any case, I see none of this bloatist v. antibloatist propaganda
> > as cogent here.  Tcl should not be part of the base system because it
> 
> It's imminently cogent - this is NOT just a technical issue, it's
> an emotional one, and if you think that all software decisions are
> made on purely technical merits then I have a certain tower in Paris
> which I could make you a _great_ deal on. ;-)

    No, in light of this discussion, it's clear that they are not.  I
humbly submit that they _should be_.  Maybe you gentlemen of core should
take a step back from the situation, take a few deep breaths, and
reconsider this issue.