DPS Initial Ideas

Bill Moran wmoran at collaborativefusion.com
Sat May 12 01:42:01 UTC 2007

Michel Talon <talon at lpthe.jussieu.fr> wrote:
> Kris Kennaway explained in 4 points why a proposal to introduce a new
> package system is doomed to failure.

What the hell?  You're making like any effort to improve the packaging
system is doomed to failure without SQLite.

Before you even go in to any more of a rant, answer me this one

Why should the FreeBSD project take on the load of importing _yet_
_another_ database library?  What's wrong with using bdb, which has
been in the base system for as long as I can remember?  It's what
various package managing tools already use with great success.

> In particular he says:
> > "I think your current proposal falls short on points 2) and 3).  In
> > particular, I don't see where SQLite is necessary to solve any
> > problems we are currently facing, and your proposal conflicts with
> > existing work."
> Existing work consists in integrating metadata in a Berkeley DB
> database, when new project would like to integrate them in SQLite
> database. Now existing software (portupgrade) has shown what can be
> gained by pushing all sort of unstructured data in a Berkeley base :-(
> In this same thread N arguments have been advanced by various people
> showing why using something more structured and formal like a SQL
> database would be beneficial.
> One of the most obvious being that the sqlite database can be edited
> as easily as a pure textfile using the sqlite3 program, or can be
> accessed programmatically from a lot of languages (C, perl, python,
> ruby) using well known and well tested libraries or connectors.
> Since sqlite is public domain, there is no licence objection to bring it
> in FreeBSD. Moreover it is a small program and which could be very
> useful to a lot of users and for a lot of alternative uses.
> As a consequence the "high bar of entry" and the "proof of necessity"
> seem to me an unreasonably stringent condition.
> Because the problem to be solved is not the "collapse under its own
> weight" of the proposals, but the collapse of the FreeBSD ports system.
> Someone (i think des) has said not long ago that Debian or Debian like
> systems were easier to maintain than FreeBSD. This is an understatement.
> -- 
> Michel TALON
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-hackers at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"

Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.

wmoran at collaborativefusion.com
Phone: 412-422-3463x4023

IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential information
and is intended only for the individual named. If the reader of
this message is not an intended recipient (or the individual
responsible for the delivery of this message to an intended
recipient), please be advised that any re-use, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this message is prohibited. Please
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received
this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or
error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost,
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The
sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or
omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a
result of e-mail transmission.

More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list