[RFC/P] Port System Re-Engineering

Aryeh M. Friedman aryeh.friedman at gmail.com
Sun Dec 2 22:36:57 PST 2007

Hash: SHA1

Darren Pilgrim wrote:
> Aryeh M. Friedman wrote:
>>> Too much talk from people not willing to do the heavy lifting.
>> There have been a number of serious attempts and in depth
>> research into various ports system issues (I still need to wade
>> through a rather long one sent to me privately)... an other
>> question did you read the preamble to this thread at all? (where
>> it says I have volunteered to do the "heavy lifting" for anything
>> that comes out this discussion [two others privately asked to
>> also be involved])
> What he's saying is that there have been many before you who have
> said and promised the same.  Ideas get hashed out and we build
> amazing bike-sheds, but there has seldom been real product.  What
> you have yet to do is distinguish yourself from history.

Sounds like a fancy way of excusing yourself from not wanting to be a
part of the process... If you really cared so much why not file (at
least privately) a set of serious answers to the survey.  As was said
in the preamble it is not totally clear if the current system is
broken enough (or at all) to warrant any serious changes.   Until that
is established it totally irresponsible in my mind to purpose any
changes (i.e. it is a complex enough system that making adhoc changes
carries more risk then reward)
> In short, patches please.  Until then, don't expect enthusiastic
> encouragement.

Depending on the outcome of the survey and followup's to it patches
may prove to be insufficient (only a wholesale rewrite will suffice)

- --
Aryeh M. Friedman
FloSoft Systems
Developer, not business, friendly
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list