From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 3 22:47:06 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 6A02F16A468 for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2007 22:47:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) Received: from dns1.vizion2000.net (77-99-36-42.cable.ubr04.chap.blueyonder.co.uk [77.99.36.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096EA13C442 for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2007 22:47:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) Received: by dns1.vizion2000.net (Postfix, from userid 1007) id 09E431CC46; Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:04:08 -0800 (PST) From: David Southwell Organization: Voice and Vision To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:04:07 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <475472FE.1000302@chuckr.org> In-Reply-To: <475472FE.1000302@chuckr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712031504.07793.david@vizion2000.net> 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 22:47:06 -0000 On Monday 03 December 2007 13:19:58 Chuck Robey wrote: > Paul Schmehl wrote: > > Here's a hint that would help a *ton* of users. Don't try to install a > > port until your ports tree is up to date. Completely up to date - as > > is, run portsnap or cvs or cvsup *first*, *then* try to install your > > port. > > > >> 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. > > > > This is the part I don't get. If you have suggestions, post them. Post > > the code that implements your suggestions. *Then* people can evaluate > > whether or not your suggestions add value to the ports system. > > > > Why the silly games? As I read them, this seems to be the primary > > objection of all the people responding who have @freebsd.org in their > > email address. They've heard it all before, but they know that actions > > speak much louder than words. If you say "the implementation of foo is > > flawed", and then you post code that, IYO, improves it, people with > > experience and knowledge can review it and say, "Hey, nice idea" or > > "sorry, your code would break ports and here's why". > > > > Without the code, all the surveys and gesticulations in this tread > > accomplish little except to irritate people. > > Why the silly games? I get the feeling that Aryeh is honestly not > understanding that he's trying to change the basic way that things get > done in FreeBSD. Has it occured to you that maybe that is the gray area - maybe it is the arrogance talking -- "this is how things are done" -- "we are the guardians".. "we know it all".. that leads to a few things NOT working as well as they might!! > He doesn't see that. M In industry, first a decision is > made that a market exists for such and such, then a study is made as to > what could be done realistically. We don't operate that way. > > What we're all afraid of, Aryeh, is that you're going to run off with > your poll of what you believe is needed (when we haven't even agreed > that anything is needed) and you'll code something up, under the > completely wrong misapprehension that if you code something up that does > what the poll results said, it would get added in, pal, that's totally, > totally false, you can ask any committer whatever, you will never get > any apriori agreement on the adding of code, no matter what, until we > can see the code. This has been endlessly argued in the past, and folks > have certainly left FreeBSD over it, but it will not change. Maybe it neeeds to. > > If you can't see that, then we will remain at loggerheads. If you can > see that, then quit asking folks to agree on stuff without showing us > code. I don't care how much research you do on what is needed, you will > never change that fact, all you're going to do is trigger knee-jerk > reactions from folks who have been *very highly* sensitized by prior > attempts to change that rule. It's not gonna happen, and you strongly > seem to be trying an end-run around it. If you honestly aren't, then > you need to do a better job of convincing folks of that fact. > > That's what it all boils down to, anyone disagree, at base? YES And strong disagreement is really needed around here and I am speaking as a freebsd user since 1994 David > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"