Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 12:51:22 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@freebsd.org> Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, ports@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pkgng 1.0 release schedule, and HEAD switch to pkgng by default schedule Message-ID: <5033E6BA.8080309@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20120821194208.GC46595@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20120820194313.GC23607@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120821132643.GE37262@felucia.tataz.chchile.org> <20120821134623.GH5044@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5033D0C0.4030805@FreeBSD.org> <CAGH67wS3jGTh-=b4X%2Bto9B67=_wpfHVqTNVYK-WZ-yVNz7gepQ@mail.gmail.com> <20120821190500.GA46595@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <5033E39C.3060700@FreeBSD.org> <20120821194208.GC46595@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 8/21/2012 12:42 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:38:04PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 8/21/2012 12:05 PM, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> 1/ if it fits the schedule: get rid of pkg_* tools in current
>>> to be able to have a fully pkgng only 10-RELEASE
>>
>> I think it would fit better with historic precedents to make pkg
>> optional (but default on) in 10, and mandatory in 11. As stated
>> before, I'm fine with removing pkg_* tools from 10 if there is
>> robust support for them in the ports tree.
>>
>> I know you're excited about this project, but let's not lose
>> sight of how big a change this is, and how important ports are to
>> the project.
>>
> That was what "if it fits the schedule" was about.
I think what I'm trying to say, ever so politely, is that what you're
suggesting isn't even an option, so it shouldn't be discussed.
--
I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do
something. And I will not let what I cannot do interfere with what
I can do.
-- Edward Everett Hale, (1822 - 1909)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5033E6BA.8080309>