Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 20:23:31 -0700 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Make this a relese coordinator decision (was Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued) Message-ID: <199708040323.UAA04935@implode.root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 03 Aug 1997 14:09:32 PDT." <3828.870642572@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> But here we speak of a tool that doesnīt necessarily belong >> into the basic system and could be put into the ports collection >> like all the others tcl / tk versions, that arenīt backward >> compatible to each other. > >I think you're missing my fundamental point. Whether TCL goes or >stays is IRRELEVANT in the long run. We could take it out right now >and that would solve the short-term crisis, no doubt making you happy >again in the bargain, but we'd still be on the wrong road. > >As the old saying goes, those who do not learn from history are >condemned to repeat it, and we've been here before. We'll be here >again, too. I repeat: TCL is just the tip of the iceberg, and >-current hasn't even BEGUN to change at the rate which I forsee for >the next year. I don't think there's any way that you or I can >predict the effects on the ports collection, but with 1000+ ports I >think it's safe to say that such effects will not be trivial or minor. >Entropy will increase - it's a physical law of software. > >And that's really the last thing I have to say about this. The issue >of TCL is in David's hands now since we've reached the kind of impasse >that the Principle Architect was empowered to solve. Whatever his >decision is, I'll respect it. Another chance to architect people's principles...I can hardly wait. Seems quite appropriate for a Sunday - I just need to get one of those collection plates (and money envelopes) so I can profit, too. :-) Tcl stays in /usr/src for now, but it needs to be kept up to date; same for perl. If Jordan doesn't have "setup" (written in tcl) ready for 3.0, then tcl will be yanked prior to the 3.0 release (and made into a port). As for the ports tree only supporting the last FreeBSD release, this seems sensible to me. The "ports" have always been a moving target between releases and the problem is only going to get worse when we expand to supporting other processor architectures. In any case, Satoshi is and always has been in charge of the ports tree and whatever he wants to do with it (within reason :-)) is his decision. Does this cover the issue completely? I admit to deleting messages in this thread with unusual fervor (people have FAR too much time on their hands!). There's a fair bit of reasoning behind the above, but since everyone is sick of arguing about this, I'll spare you the analysis. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199708040323.UAA04935>