Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 12:23:21 +0200 From: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued) Message-ID: <19970803122321.15396@klemm.gtn.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970802232349.381A-100000@Journey2.mat.net>; from Chuck Robey on Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 11:36:41PM -0400 References: <15692.870549801@time.cdrom.com> <Pine.BSF.3.96.970802232349.381A-100000@Journey2.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Aug 02, 1997 at 11:36:41PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
>
> This argument is not really centered on being bloatist, at least not
> totally. I would fight taking perl out of the kernel (I want perl5.004
> brought in) but I'll be pleased to see tcl make an exit. Might a
> compromise be made, let tcl go away, in exchange for updating perl?
The whole thing started with Satoshi´s citicism about the
-current "circus".
This came up because of great differences between -current
and -stable, which makes it nearly impossible, to support
a 1028 ports monster.
So he wanted only to support -stable in the future. But I think
this is a step behind.
Ports have to be buildable on -current and -stable, because :
a) -current is the next upcoming -stable release
b) people like me, who have only one machine, usually
run the bleeding edge,
c) people who have interest in trying SMP are boud to
current
Figure out, if ports are only made for stable ... If -current
does more and more incompatible changes to -stable ... Who
should done the fine work of porting perhaps 1250 ports
to -current, which will become 3.0-RELEASE and 3.0-STABLE after
that ???
I think the only question is ... what has to be done now,
that ports are buildable under -current _AND_ -stable fine
without too much problems.
So to say ....
This is not a decision of dropping a pet toy, it is
a decision of a release engineer, who is responsible
for the direction of the OS and that a ports collection
doesn´t get out of sync with everything other than 2.2-STABLE.
Andreas ///
--
Andreas Klemm | klemm.gtn.com - powered by
Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD
http://www.freebsd.org/~fsmp/SMP/SMP.html
http://www.freebsd.org/~fsmp/SMP/benches.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970803122321.15396>