duration of the ports freeze
Aryeh M. Friedman
aryeh.friedman at gmail.com
Sat Dec 1 08:10:14 PST 2007
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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
> 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
Aryeh M. Friedman
Developer, not business, friendly
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the freebsd-ports