From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Wed Apr 20 04:11:42 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B274B0D157 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 04:11:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0991113A1 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2016 04:11:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nwhitehorn@freebsd.org) Received: from zeppelin.tachypleus.net (75-101-50-44.static.sonic.net [75.101.50.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id u3K4BdS8020528 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:11:40 -0700 Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org References: <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> <20160420040711.GL1554@FreeBSD.org> From: Nathan Whitehorn Message-ID: <5717017B.4070602@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:11:39 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160420040711.GL1554@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVapAnjnxSsK2T1S6s6wunebsZuSsqyiM9CQmPIx7P99oQ+IvlA1m3alRjZCJgsXui8sRbZmshERF5Yze7JT7FhXQSscfrYz+yI= X-Sonic-ID: C;RtRc+60G5hGZwvjNyE/n4w== M;pOe9+60G5hGZwvjNyE/n4w== X-Spam-Flag: No X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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, 20 Apr 2016 04:11:42 -0000 On 04/19/16 21:07, Glen Barber wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 06:59:38AM +0300, dan_partelly wrote: >>> Sadly the tenor and tone of the discussion isn’t one where progress is >>> made. The tone has been a bit toxic and demanding, which grinds people >> into >>> dust, rather than motivating them to fix things. You might call it a >>> discussion, but it reads to me more as a bunch of angry villagers >> storming >>> the castle. No good can come from that. Tone down the outrage by a >> factor >>> of 100 and try to have the conversation again. >>> >> I'm frankly perplexed by this statement. Its seldom I perceived so much >> sorrow and bitterness in 6 lines. There is no castle Warner, unless you >> want one to exist, one where you can isolate yourself from the indentured >> peasants and anything they say. Beyond your thick walls you'll be well >> served, >> every idea outside your wals will be toned down by a factor of 100 by the >> time >> it reaches the lord, becoming total agreement with anything the lord >> thinks. >> >> I cant believe I wrote this shit. But then again, I cant believe you just >> wrote >> what you did. >> > And it's responses like this that are severely demotivating. > > Glen > Yes, this is not helpful. Talking about walls and lords and whatever can only make people angry (or demotivated) and is never persuasive. This is really great work; there is a discussion about some nits in how to distribute the results that corresponds to maybe 1% of the total patch. -Nathan