duration of the ports freeze

[Aryeh M. Friedman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>>> I do not think we need a compromise we need a different system.
>>> We need one that preserves continuity of support for existing
>>> systems while the new releases are testedin a way that does not
>>> adversely impact them. The priority needs to be the current
>>> user base not a desire to rush a new release out the door at
>>> all costs.
>>
>> Over the last few days I have read a very good book that sheds a
>> lot of light on this "Beyond Software Architecture" by Luke
>> Huffman (Addison Wesley, 2003, ISBN: 0-201-77954-8) [I am sure it
>> is somewhere on the p2p nets].   His thesis is that there are two
>> side by side architectures both of which must be in sync for a
>> really good solution.   There is the technical and the marketing
>> architectures. Disclaimer he a decidedly MS/mass market view.
>>
>> The port freeze might make a lot of sense from the technical
>> architecture but it makes horrible sense from the marketing.   I
>> think the FreeBSD community would do well to consider his main
>> points in any major redo of the current standard way of doing
>> things.
>
> Yes, but if I am going to do things from a MS/Marketing
> perspective, how about this:  Maybe the way to fix the problem is
> not by changing the way we do things, but by changing expectations.
>
He actually singles out MS for some extremely harsh criticism in their
lack of keeping the two in sync.
>
> For some reason, people contributing to this mailing list are
> getting frustrated because some of the applications are now getting
>  to be about a month old.  But why should we expect to have the
> latest and greatest in version number of application?  It is
> because this is what we usually have, and so a periodic hiccup is
> out of the ordinary and so frustrates us.
>
> But suppose you are running Red Hat Linux instead.  Do you also get
>  the latest and greatest in this super timely manner?  (To be
> honest this is not a rhetorical question, but my guess is "no.")
>
> In fact, who feels this frustration.  Is it the ordinary user?  Or
> is it us port maintainers who wish they could get their more recent
>  PR's accepted?
>
> Surely this frustration is felt by us because we have information
> that things could be a little more up to date.  But if we weren't
> in the know, then we wouldn't be so upset.

I am not suggesting we do a major overhaul before ports are
unfrozen... what I am suggesting is there is always room for
improvement and the frustrations voiced should be looked as an
opportunity to improve it instead of us (the complainers) crying in
our milk.




- --
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

iD8DBQFHUYdj358R5LPuPvsRAmVmAJ9tTZcYeh/vPZApCAQST3Q9cM1apgCfaFjw
sz4K3dhH9iovN1mVwbWd9Uw=
=1rIX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----