On Tue, 19 Apr 2016, Warner Losh wrote:

Sadly the tenor and tone of the discussion isn?t one where progress is made. The tone has been a bit toxic and demanding, which grinds people into dust, rather than motivating them to fix things. You might call it a discussion, but it reads to me more as a bunch of angry villagers storming the castle. No good can come from that. Tone down the outrage by a factor of 100 and try to have the conversation again.

I agree. Really, I do! But this must work both ways, and I can say unequivocally that my earlier interactions with the 'pkg' people have been unpleasant. Some time ago I asked about how pkg interacts with LOCALBASE!=/usr/local. This because I like to build ports from /usr/ports, but install them under /usr/pkg so as to keep /usr/local free for truly local code.

This works fine (after a source rebuild of pkg), but for tools like portupgrade (from ports), which use pkg under the hood to handle dependency checks. pkg against the ports tree vs. pkg against my LOCALBASE=/usr/pkg were conflicting. So I asked some questions about how to resolve this. The response was bizarre. Wanting to use pkg with a different directory seemed almost offensive to the peoploe who answered. There was no thought of even considering the use case. I ended up filing a bugzilla report, but I see that got close with 'works as intended' a couple of days ago.

I can't see how pkg as a base package manager would allow me to continue with my ports->/usr/pkg mapping.

I really think the biggest problem people have at the moment is the complete and utter lack of respect core and the pkg crew have for the end users of the system. I'm pretty sure we all get WHY this work is being done. We don't all AGREE with why it's being done. And that is the conversation we are trying to have. But every time we try to have it, we get slammed down as a bunch of ungrateful whining non-coders.

Lots of people wrote a lot of lines of code for Linux. Is the argument that we should just adopt that? Because it's written, it must be good?

You guys need to get over that and come back to the table to have a rational discussion with the vast majority of people who actually USE this OS. All glory to Juniper and Citrix and everyone else who packages the OS into their various 'appliances'. I use both of the above at work, and believe me, for the amount of money they take out of my pocket, they can hire their own release engineers to deal with this internally without inflicting this on everyone else.

And I really think THAT is the crux of the argument everyone is trying to make.

To reiterate: packages are good. In moderation. As with all other things. But they have to solve the general case, and pkg - both the tool and the methodology in its current and pending incarnations - does not.

I, and others, are trying to have a real conversation about this. But the blowback is incredible. Let alone incredulous.


freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to