Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 22:04:56 -0500 From: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) To: dg@root.com Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Latest Current build failure Message-ID: <v02140b0cae53ed7d1adc@[208.2.87.4]>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> I cannot do "what I want". > Please realize that I'm sure it would be of significant benefit to you > personally and perhaps to some larger set of people, but as always, we have to > look at the big picture and balance our resources to satisfy the largest > number of people with the effort that we expend. It has to be this way for > both practical and pragmatic reasons. Actually, I personally receive no value. I'm quite happy running "-stable" or "picking and choosing" things from the cvs tree. I offered to help solve a problem that keeps popping up and distracting you (collectively) from the things that you want to spend time doing. I happen to feel that improvements of this type in the long run are more important than the code improvements. Whether you like it or no, we have to "sell" FreeBSD. Making not only the code, but the organization, more user friendly will influence far more people than will the excellent quality of the internals which you already do well. > However...like Michael just suggested, nothing prevents you from setting up >such a framework for a "-recent" distribution. If you come up with a model >that works, we might even arrange for it to be replicated in various places >to increase the distribution potential. The key here is that you are (from >my perspective anyway) trying to force us to adopt some personal grand plan >of yours and even if it was a good idea, trying to get us to do more work >through coercion is entirely the wrong approach and you should expect your >efforts to fail. I have a different perspective. There IS a problem. Jordan, Terry, Nate, and I, and perhaps others, have discussed a possible solution. I offered to be the coordinator of the effort to move to something that will address the problem. I have even given a detailed description of the new scheme. This new scheme will buy absolutely nothing but additional headaches if you attempt to run it in parallel with the existing chaos. Even if it were implemented, it would take additional effort to build the critical user mass that makes it worthwhile. You would also have the "documentation" problem of explaining "how this is different from that". The other approach, which I advocate, is to bite a bullet here and there and make some changes that lay the groundwork for better improvements in the future. Since you, collectively, are unwilling to accept anything that an outsider does unless it is a completely implemented, tested and documented package, you will never, IMHO, solve the fundamental structural problems of your approach nor realize the values that can be reached in incremental steps.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?v02140b0cae53ed7d1adc>