Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 13:19:23 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8) Message-ID: <571765BB.3050908@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <5716FA70.4080604@freebsd.org> References: <E1asbZj-0003Ra-Qs@rmm6prod02.runbox.com> <76093.1461096570@critter.freebsd.dk> <5716AD65.8070007@shrew.net> <BF66EA01-E073-45F0-8F9E-22D57E8871B0@bsdimp.com> <5716FA70.4080604@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> It would also be nice to get a statement of what the intended scope of > these patches is from some of the people involved in the project. It's a > major change to the system and it would be nice to have some kind of > architectural document about what is happening. I'm not sure, for > instance, what the release for 11 looks like with these changes, what > changes need to be made to the installer (something of particular > interest to me), how we build install media now that base is no longer > self-contained (due to lack of pkg), what specific problems were > intended to be solved, how package dependencies work, etc. Something > like a few-page white paper would be *really* helpful for those of us > who weren't at the BSDcan where this was discussed. Even a wiki page > would help a lot. I really like FreeBSD, I am using it for more than 15 years on daily basis. FreeBSD had good and bad times (releases / changes) but one thing stays always the same - still bad communication about new features, work in progress etc. I think it is not too hard to publish papers about new base packages. Proposals, current state, ToDo to better inform users about upcoming changes. I think these informations already exist in some private form between developers. If these informations were more public I think there will be less annoyed posts in mailinglist and more constructive critics / ideas / patches. I did a guick search and found only one closely related page about packaged base: https://wiki.freebsd.org/FreeBSD-ng last edited 2014-03-11 Even this old page has "Known problems" mentioning the situation what we have now in this thread (fed-up people on both sides). So I think this was expected and people involved in this project could have do communication better. I had some concerns about it and some of them were explained and canceled after reading more than 100 posts in this thread. (some concerns remain). I believe if it was written in FreeBSD Wiki, there were not be so much dissapointed posts. I don't want to offend anybody on this list or FreeBSD team. I just think that things like this can and should be communicated better next time. Sysadmins and sysdevelopers have different point of view to a lot of things and it is better to talk about it before things are done and cannot be undone. Miroslav Lachmanhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?571765BB.3050908>