Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 08:20:22 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rcs Message-ID: <525422B6.9040906@mu.org> In-Reply-To: <20131008.170444.74714516.sthaug@nethelp.no> References: <60177810-8DC4-4EA3-8040-A834B79039D2@orthanc.ca> <52538EDC.2080001@freebsd.org> <52541202.3010707@mu.org> <20131008.170444.74714516.sthaug@nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 10/8/13 8:04 AM, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: >>> I think the fact is that most direct users of RCS use it in a very >>> simple way, and >>> it works just fine for that. with no real need for any updates or any >>> change. >> With all due respect Julian, The more we discuss this more this really >> points to the problem that FreeBSD appears to be a challenge to install >> packages into such that a package moving out of base is such a big deal. >> >> Can we fix that instead? >> >> I mean, this change should really not be a big deal, but yet it is and >> this speaks to the core of FreeBSD utility. > Not commenting on RCS here, but on the concept of moving packages out > of the base: > > - For some of us, the attraction of FreeBSD is that it is a tightly > integrated system, and the base contains enough useful functionality > that we don't *have* to add a lot of packages. > > - Each package that is moved out of the base system means less useful > functionality in the base system - and for me: Less reason to use > FreeBSD instead of Linux. > > I absolutely see the problem of maintaining out-of-date packages in > the base system, and the desirability of making the base system less > reliant on GPL. I'm mostly troubled by the fact that there seems to > be a rather strong tendency the last few years of having steadily > less functionality in the base system - and I'm not at all convinced > that the right balance has been found here. > > This discussion is not new, and I don't expect to convince any new > persons... > > I'm sure other devs will disagree, but with ~15 years of FreeBSD experience and ~13 years as a dev, my very strong opinion is that this tightly coupled system is actually a boat anchor sinking us. Just because no one else does it a certain way, does not mean that a unique way of doing something is correct and/or sustainable. Maybe in 1995, 1999, or 2005 even, but not today. Especially in the context of add-on tools like rcs. What we need to discuss is lowering the bar to making custom installs. I personally find that installing FreeBSD is useless until I install "screen, zsh, vim-lite, git" why is that so manual for me? Why can't I just register a package set somewhere so that all I have to type in is "alfred.perlstein.devel" into a box during the installer and I get all my packages by default? -- Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?525422B6.9040906>