Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:21:53 -0800 From: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@winston.osd.bsdi.com> To: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> Cc: Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Moving Things [was Re: List of things to move from main tree] Message-ID: <98614.982362113@winston.osd.bsdi.com> In-Reply-To: Message from Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> of "Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:34:37 PST." <200102161835.f1GIZOB29603@cwsys.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Guys guys guys, This whole thread (especially as pertaining to MTAs) comes up periodically and it always goes the same way. To use a rather western analogy, a bunch of torch-waving reformers ride into town calling for the death of a particularly useless and/or controversial utility and those townspeople who don't agree with this point of view start shooting at them from the second story windows. The reformers eventually get pissed-off at being shot at by the ungrateful people they're supposedly trying to save from their own folly and they ride out again in disgust. It always goes this way largely due to the fact that all sides are basically "right." A lot of folks want various interesting types of functionality in their OS which they also don't want to have to play hide-and-seek for as part of some grueling initiation rite - an OS should do what they want it to do. A lot of other folks want a more basic OS core which is easier to understand, easier to maintain and much easier to use in situations which require a fairly small OS footprint. Even more folks have Very Strong Opinions about what the right balance to strike between functionality and simplicity for FreeBSD in general is, even though few of them actually agree on the scale settings. The needs of all these various interest groups are not mutually exclusive. The problem is and always has been that instead of starting new jihads concerning specific components, nobody really sits down and says "Hmm, /usr/src as updated by cvsup is a good idea. /usr/ports is also a good idea. In here somewhere is an even better good idea which encompasses many of the best parts of both." Trust me folks, there are MUCH BETTER mechanisms than ports and a neatly organized /usr/src which would give us a more tree-structured FreeBSD, with "minbin" at the very root and things like MTAs several levels up, while also providing the nice free-standing taxonomy that /usr/src does. We've learned a tremendous amount about source code control and makefile wrappers over the last 9 years of this project, we simply haven't really applied that knowledge to our process in any truly significant ways. We just keep shoe-horning more shit into the same shaped box and complaining that we're running out of room while simultaneously defending the existing structures as somehow sacrosanct or, at worst, simply needing a fresh coat of paint and some minor remodeling. BAH! :) I'd even be willing to take the opium pipe out of my mouth and write down some of these grandiose claims in the form of a much clearer prototype, but before spending that kind of energy on it I'd first like to see some general sign that people aren't dead-set on arguing about individual leaves rather than thinking about the whole tree for a change. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?98614.982362113>