duration of the ports freeze
stephen at math.missouri.edu
Sat Dec 1 15:05:41 PST 2007
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, 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
> 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.
It's nothing like global warming. Global warming is an ill understood
problem, with various estimates ranging from basically not existing to
it's too late and we are all doomed anyway, and the potential
consequences of not fixing it if it is a problem are widespread and
Issues with the ports freeze are very well understood, with consequences
of getting it wrong either way being fairly inconsequential, and always
something that can be revisited without the whole world going down the
tubes. The very worst that can happen is that a marginally used operating
system will go down the tubes, and someone will fork the code long before
To compare "ports freeze" to "global warming" is hyperbole in the extreme.
>> 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!!
>> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-ports