From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 23 17:45:50 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17DD3E1 for ; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:45:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f47.google.com (mail-qa0-f47.google.com [209.85.216.47]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7329198 for ; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:45:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id w5so4468896qac.34 for ; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:45:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qC8srmo87ohnF9+ZjaovGLTlTTB/blJoDqKpF/6Z928=; b=QFPaGFhr9paQacWoFIOaMyQoeCUEwWN6IOQC78KgRqR48pB9O1ovpeAYrmPVNxLscu X6+uDfjxTvAb5/nxE5rCNwpfdP8Ll2csvqdOirIOYHu2tuSrOwHir1T8Sx4hsjYxbYbu Yxv6lbITAnE7zDR1ES/QsxBCKvu5ktOEelZutr7E+ao0V3x4L7qiT/hihDG1kHw0xKON BnUHez2MBh364Kuvu9bXtzJ5xS/8XJAkE/uol4xVKW4mvHqmNPOgWoxkLfyesx9bwDal xEbf8z/ZePCnsGHhoCcq9mWpZgzW8JtTla1QhRWSBDs76XFDDHgFeLPewwqqYyFeLYji 2AMw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmPSW81uY2rREF0nLICm+Bs6dnV7uSh61VdnpALsJ6cnFv1hoWB3xBlQfKG693k1SpXlSdN X-Received: by 10.140.41.197 with SMTP id z63mr1382672qgz.102.1395596354523; Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.4] (pool-96-225-163-109.nrflva.fios.verizon.net. [96.225.163.109]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l20sm17780941qgd.16.2014.03.23.10.39.13 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Mar 2014 10:39:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <532F1C48.7080003@ohlste.in> Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:39:20 -0400 From: Jim Ohlstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Linimon Subject: Re: reason 23 why we've moved to linux References: <532EDDD0.80700@ohlste.in> <20140323153843.GA16935@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20140323153843.GA16935@lonesome.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Randy Bush , freebsd-stable stable X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:45:50 -0000 Hello Mark, On 3/23/14, 11:38 AM, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 09:12:48AM -0400, Jim Ohlstein wrote: >> last I checked there were over 1500 active ports related PR's alone. > > Current count is 1851. See http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portsoverall.py . > > The whole list is at: > > http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portsprsbyexplanation.py?explanation=existing&sortby=prnumber&reverse . > > I did a little rough data reduction for curiosity about changes related > to "new infra": > > % grep -i clang foo | wc -l > 32 > % grep -i stage foo | wc -l > 37 > % grep -i staging foo | wc -l > 31 > % grep -i options foo | wc -l > 31 > % grep -i cflags foo | wc -l > 5 > % grep USE_ foo | wc -l > 22 > % grep WITH_ foo | wc -l > 19 > > as opposed to: > > % grep -i update foo | wc -l > 280 > > NB: I didn't check for overlaps. > > I was expected to see more "new infra" changes than 200. > > I will note that about a third of the PRs are from the last 3 months. > I no longer have an insight into how fast PRs are turned over but it > is quite brisk. > > mcl > Thanks for your response. I don't think that tells the whole story. How many PR's contain "broken" or "broken on 10" or "break" or "build" or similar? Another few I'm sure. Updates are important too. Many of us look forward to new features not to mention important security fixes. The only ones which may not be "urgent" or "important" are the new port proposals of which I counted 181. (I have a few in there and I am waiting patiently. I spent quite a few hours working on a port of MonetDB which sits there untaken. Maybe it sucks but I'd like feedback/help if needed. I have others for which I directly approached a committer whom I like and respect since he maintains similar ports, and was told he's too busy.) I'm not trying to make this more a bitch-fest than it is, but I'll point out the obvious that if a third of PR's are from the last three months, that means two thirds are older than three months! I don't find that to be "quite brisk". If the ratio were reversed it I might be inclined to agree. My point however, perhaps was missed. While I did squawk that the new pkg system is in a state of flux and therefore not appropriate for sole use on 10, I was separately mentioning the glacial pace at which ports related PR's get looked at, taken, and committed. There is no obvious triage system. It's simply if someone is "interested" they take the PR. If no one is interested, it sits. Imagine if a hospital emergency department functioned that way. A gunshot wound might sit in the waiting room because seeing a case of strep throat would be less work, or a laceration needing sutures might be more fun. And one case of strep throat might sit six hours while another waited only 30 minutes because it was up to the doctors and nurses to decide who they wanted to see and when, not based on any system of necessity, urgency or how long a problem has been waiting. In the current system, if there is a maintainer, s/he may not answer a PR for months, even if that person is a FreeBSD committer. If ports don't build, that *is* a big issue because pretty much everyone uses them. With two thirds of ports related PR's over three months old, updating your system is a crapshoot at best. -- Jim Ohlstein "Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference." - Mark Twain