Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 30 May 1999 20:34:53 -0500 (CDT)
From:      Jay Nelson <jdn@acp.qiv.com>
To:        Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>
Cc:        Nik Clayton <nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk>, freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Sorry, found it explained during jadetex installation
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905301938090.9023-100000@acp.qiv.com>
In-Reply-To: <19990531001359.C34894@titan.klemm.gtn.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 31 May 1999, Andreas Klemm wrote:

>Huh, didn't know that. I thought it were only the tweaking of the
>four (?) variables you mention during installation.
>
>So your installation instructions are not complete ;-)

No -- I think the instructions were fine. They left me with the choice
that I thought was appropriate. The beauty of the ports system is
that, if I don't want to play ball, I can delete the port with no harm
done. It's difficult to balance the needs of those new to a system and
those who want to see how it's used in a new context. I think Nik has
done a good job and I would be hard pressed to arrive at a productive
alternative.

>Or would it perhaps be sufficient, to get it to run ?
>
>If the latter is the case, then it would be o.k. in my opineon,
>to do the modifications (that you already suggested to the user)
>automatically, but telling people during install:

Strong disagreement -- damned near rant level disagreement. Strikes me
as a MicroSoft approach.

>	a) that some basic tuning has been done, so that jadetex is
>	   able to produce output for the FreeBSD document project

I shot you in the foot for your own good? That approach doesn't win
many converts.

>	b) that it might need some fine tuning of the other variables.

Back to the drawing board for another round of twiddling? Without my
agreement? That makes for bad blood.

>All in all you are now more likely to get a running port.

What is more important -- a port that runs, no matter the cost, or a
port that will help some one, who may have other projects that can't
afford to be shot down, join the project?

Sorry, Andreas, I think the current mechanism is well balanced and
honors the configuration I already have in place, yet raises the
appropriate warnings for those new to the system.

It's difficult to balance the needs of a new user with the needs of an
admin required to meet the needs of the many who may use the system. I
think that's one of the reasons why any Unix has failed to capture the
average desktop audience -- and will probably continue to fail. Your
suggestion is good, but assumes that everyone is running a single user
desktop. That's not the case.

I think the whole FreeBSD project has done an excellent job of
combining these disparate objectives. It sometimes makes it difficult
for a new user, but then again, so does any other flavor of Unix. I
think that, ultimately, it's best to respect the needs of a production
system rather than make it a no-brainer for the desktop user. The
desktop user can come up to speed, yet an admin shot in the foot will
spend hours, generally in the evening or weekend, repairing the
change. The admin shot in the foot will also never forget.

That's the exact type of experience that makes Solaris attractive.

This is my 2 bits, only. I believe that those who do the work, call
the shots. If these are the shots you call, please give us adequate
heads-up.

-- Jay



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905301938090.9023-100000>