> Not taking a side on this discussion, yet… but the first thing that
I do not believe there are sides to take, because I am absolutely positive
everybody in this thread wants only whats better for FreeBSD, so there is
only one side. It is an aspect which in the heat of emotions some people
seem to forget.
>> The benefits might be worth it in the long run.
The benefits are great and they are immediately available upon release of
a packaged base. I am all for it . Yet there issue, such as the UI which
doesn't handle well big numbers of packages, mechanism issues and
convention issues which where raised in another thread and went unanswered
by devs so far.
Personally my greatest fear is that what happen to VIMAGE wouldn't happen
with this great feature. Namely, that it goes in effect with a "good
enough" implementation (which may well be a great success for some uses)
and then we have to work with the "good enough" implementation for half a
decade before it is made bullet proof and orthogonal. Or that UI issues are
never solved, claiming that they are "largely cosmetic" anyway. I wouldn't
mind waiting 2 point releases for example
to become that way, but look, for VIMAGE takes what ... 6 years ?
(Nota bene: I do not contest that VIMAGE is great. )
Pople raised valid concerns, devs imvolved in the project seen them, yet
those who spearhead the base pkg project did not found appropriate to make
a statement to quell ppl fears regarding their commitment to see to all the
issues in a pre-determined time frame. I.E a commitment to make it bullet
proof by 11.1 as example. Some felt threatened and unappreciated, which is
a problem. Both for them and for us, the user. Because the users of this OS
are not only the companies who employ the developers, there are thousand of
people scattered through the world, ppl who have a great stake invested in
this operating system, by the simple fact that they use it everywhere.
Another small issue, is in general the politics of the FreeBSD dev team
regarding bug fixes. I personally would be glad to see more commitment from
the dev team regarding bug fixes. It is kinda disappointing to see known
going on and on for years, "good enough" susbsytems having the same fate,
and so on.
I beleive the team per-ansamble should make a more solid commitment to fix
outstanding issues, and try to outline a policy regarding bugs and
implementations which lack orthogonality or are only partially completed
(even if this partially means 95% ).
> occurred to me is that such way of packaging is traditional for the
> “distributions”. I could imagine people worrying at subconscious level
> FreeBSD is going the Linux way… and that if they wanted such a model,
> would be using Linux instead. Today, people have more choice in
> but if FreeBSD goes the Linux way, someone else will fill the void — so
> worries in general.
> I can see the support nightmare that a packaged base would bring, but as
> always — this is not enough to judge it. The benefits might be worth it
> the long run.
> I was a long time user of BSD/OS and then switched to FreeBSD when that
> was killed. In BSD/OS everything was monolithic. It was rock stable.
> dependable and very easy to support. My first few years with FreeBSD
> spent to get used that the OS was not just one piece, but you could end
> with different installs.. A bit more support efforts. Not that I am
> complaining :)
> As long as packaged base is not mandatory, it is fine by me.
> email@example.com mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"