duration of the ports freeze

[Stephen Montgomery-Smith]

On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:

> -----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.
>

Excellent idea!