organization

[ALeine]

imp at bsdimp.com wrote:

> You've proven my point exactly:  Some folks want to see i386 moved to
> arch/i386, others think it is stupid to do that.  Discussion isn't
> possible here, so nothing will happen since there's no compelling
> reason to do anything, just a weak argument about how things might be
> nicer.

If such a layout change were to happen I think the least time wasting
procedure would go something like this:

- issue a request for new layout propositions
- for a week accept proposition submissions (web based)
- have the FreeBSD community vote on the proposed layouts (web based)
- assign a deadline by which a decision has to be made and then discuss
  the most popular layouts and try to get the Core Team and the
  committers to reach a consensus

No consensus, no change. In any case, a lot of time and energy would be
spent discussing this change, it's more of a bike shed issue than some
might think, it's just not worth even starting this process in the near
future.

> The fact that we even consider cvsup load when discussing this means
> that clearly it is a weak idea: if we have to worry about the impact
> on how we distribute the sources for a change, isn't that really a
> weird criteria to use?

It does not prove that the idea itself is weak, it's a criterion that
proves that CVS is not well suited to such changes. The thing is that
even if such a change would be trivial to implement with no additional
overhead, the process of deciding which new layout to adopt would take
too much time and energy compared to the benefits gained by adopting
a new layout, at least at this stage of development.

ALeine
___________________________________________________________________
WebMail FREE http://mail.austrosearch.net