Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 17:52:04 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> To: David Southwell <david@vizion2000.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: duration of the ports freeze Message-ID: <4751E594.6010105@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <200712011450.58878.david@vizion2000.net> References: <33640.194.74.82.3.1196149681.squirrel@galain.elvandar.org> <200712011149.11212.david@vizion2000.net> <20071201134519.S16007@cauchy.math.missouri.edu> <200712011450.58878.david@vizion2000.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Southwell wrote: > On Saturday 01 December 2007 11:54:40 Stephen Montgomery-Smith > wrote: >> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, David Southwell wrote: >>> On Saturday 01 December 2007 10:28:40 Erik Trulsson wrote: >>>> Personally, as a user, I have never really been even slightly >>>> inconvienced by any of the ports tree freezes. >>> All I can say is bully for you! The question is how do we get >>> rid of a p[roblem even if it is not a disadvantage for you >>> personally. It is disappointing when one hears arguments not to >>> change simply because one particular individual is not >>> disadvantaged by a currently illogical and antiquated solution >>> to a problem that will inevitably grow as the number of ports >>> increase. >>> >>> We need to grasp the nettle while we may!! >> I think that you and Aryeh are not getting that it is not just >> "bully for you." There is a major effort required to change the >> way we do ports. Even if the current system has some >> imperfections, you have to persuade the FreeBSD community that >> the benfits of fixing things are greater than the costs. >> >> My personal assessment is that now is NOT the time to grap the >> nettle. Over time the ports system will acquire more and more >> problems, until perhaps in ten or twenty years time it will be >> unusable. Then it will be time to fix it, when we have a clearer >> picture of what all the problems really are. Or maybe by then >> things will have happened that make this whole issue moot. I >> just don't think it is worth the effort to fix this problem now, >> especially when the benefits will only be to a few power users. > Just who does not get it!! This reminds me of the presidential > "there is no such thing as global warming" response to climate > change debate. Wait for twenty years until events force us to fix > it and then we will do something. >> Look, its good that you feel the freedom to complain, and >> advocate for change. But don't get upset when others say they >> like the status quo. They need to have freedom to say their >> piece too. > The issue is about responsibility. Clearly the price of status quo > is at minimum inconvenience for many and at worst unacceptable > interference for an undefined number. What is wrong with trying to > fix it now? Those who advocate change are not trying to get a fix > it to make life worse for anyone. There is nothing wrong with > change!! > I am willing to put my code where my mouth is if we can get a good percentage of ports into a new system to test the two side by side (say the entire xorg meta port)... note to the skeptics out there this is not meant to replace ports just be a proof of concept for a possible replacement. - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems Developer, not business, friendly http://www.flosoft-systems.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHUeWU358R5LPuPvsRAntEAJ9l/uY3QGNaPbSAbV77uY+Il0ETxQCgrS53 E9rNq/iviTAJ2SmuI/QKmnY= =wZf9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4751E594.6010105>