Thank you (for making the ports less boring).

[Chad Perrin]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:10:51AM +0200, Michal Varga wrote:
> 
> So believe me, as soon as my systems are all on [insert any modern and
> properly maintained desktop OS/distribution that works, which based on
> my tests over the last few weeks quite nicely fills Arch Linux, but then
> many else would surely work too] and thus my current work on constantly
> fixing *my* FreeBSDs is cut down by 99%, I'm all hands in for some good
> old fashioned volunteering.

In my experience, FreeBSD is actually on the high side of the stable,
sanely operating, well-maintained scale.  That is not to say that I find
it highly stable, very sanely operating, and extremely well-maintained.
It just means that everything else I've used with any regularity is even
worse.  That means dozens of Linux distributions and almost every MS
Windows release since 3.1 way back in the early '90s.  I'm not in a
position to speak directly of those characteristics for Arch Linux, but
not for lack of trying: the two times I tried it, the damned thing
wouldn't even install.

From what I have seen, any time someone says "Oh, I don't have any
problems with this OS at all," for *any* OS -- and that includes the
couple of times I've said that over the years -- the reason for saying so
is a lack of lengthy experience with that OS or just a combination of
pure blind luck and very low-demand usage.  Every OS I've used with any
regularity really kinda blows where one kind of stability or another is
concerned; most of them suck in terms of the usability of whatever is its
equivalent of a userland on that system; all of them suck to varying
degrees where maintenance of the OS project is concerned (no offense to
the people working hard to maintain it, most of whom do very good work).

My prediction is that moving to Arch Linux will probably result in
temporary relief from the problems of FreeBSD, but the experience will
eventually be soured by the gradual recognition of (somewhat different)
problems.  For the moment, FreeBSD is still the best workstation OS I
have encountered, for my purposes -- after about six years.  That's some
kind of record for me, and this is why I'm trying to avail myself of the
relevant knowledge to contribute to the project by picking up
maintainership if an unmaintained port.

By the way, making it easier to get this stuff "right" would help a lot:

* ensuring that there's more complete documentation for port maintenance
  (including adding the stuff about the CVS attic to the porter's
  handbook)

* making the documentation more approachable for beginners who may not be
  C programmers with an in-depth understanding of makefiles

* even making the documentation and/or operation of the send-pr tools
  more approachable, if only because this is an interface to ports
  maintenance that should be available and approachable for *every* user
  of the OS

That's just my relatively uninformed opinion.  I welcome corrections of
any misunderstandings under which I may labor.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20110913/4fd30069/attachment.pgp