From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 14 05:29:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F62D1065672; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:29:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516058FC0C; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:29:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (c-67-180-24-15.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.24.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id pBE5TQ0J045114 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:29:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4EE8344C.2070509@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 21:29:48 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111103 Thunderbird/3.1.16 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Julian H. Stacey" References: <201112140350.pBE3ns2M011225@fire.js.berklix.net> In-Reply-To: <201112140350.pBE3ns2M011225@fire.js.berklix.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Doug Barton , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CVS removal from the base X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:29:37 -0000 On 12/13/11 7:49 PM, Julian H. Stacey wrote: > Hi, > Reference: >> From: Doug Barton >> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:29:02 -0800 >> Message-id: <4EE7C39E.6040403@FreeBSD.org> > Doug Barton wrote: >> On 12/11/2011 06:14, Julian H. Stacey wrote: >>> Doug Barton wrote: >>>> On 12/02/2011 04:35, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>>>> I think you're missing the point a little. >>>>> >>>>> The point is, you have to keep in mind how comfortable people feel >>>>> about things, and progress sometimes makes people uncomfortable. I >>>>> think you should leave these changes bake for a while and let people >>>>> get comfortable with the changing status quo. >>>> The fact that we have so many people who are radically change-averse, no >>>> matter how rational the change; is a bug, not a feature. >>>> >>>> This particular bug is complicated dramatically by the fact that the >>>> majority view seems to lean heavily towards "If I use it, it must be the >>>> default and/or in the base" rather than seeing ports as part of the >>>> overall operating SYSTEM. >>> BSD is more conservative. More value given to stability of availability >>> of interfaces& tools etc, >> Having things in ports doesn't make them less available. :) > It didn't used to. It risks it now, since in last months, some > ports/ have been targeted by a few rogue commiters purging, who > want to toss ports out from one release to another without warning > of a DEPRECATED= in previous release Makefiles. > which brings up teh possibility of 1st class ports.. which are kept more as part of the system.. (sorry for sounding like a broken record..) >