On Sat, Aug 9, 2025, at 12:06 PM, Pat Maddox wrote: > On Fri, Aug 8, 2025, at 7:20 AM, David Chisnall wrote: >> Every upgrade flow I have on every FreeBSD machine I use is simplified >> by pkgbase. Having fewer tools is a usability win. Having a single >> command upgrade everything is a usability win. If you *want to* >> upgrade only some things, that’s one extra command-line flag. > > That's perfectly reasonable to me. > > I guess the core question is: why change the established policy of > updating base and third-party separately, and require users to use a > flag to retain it? Why not retain the policy, and require users to use > a flag to update both separately?
This should be: "why change the established policy of updating base and third-party separately, and require users to use a flag to retain it? Why not retain the policy, and require users to use a flag to update both **together**?" > - Because it's so inherently superior to the old way that it should be > the default, and people who want the old way just need to read UPDATING > to know the tweaks to make? > - Because doing so would make the semantics of `pkg` too confusing? So > we accept the tradeoff of changing established upgrade policy, and > again people need to be familiar with UPDATING? > - Other reasons? > > pkgbase seems like a fine mechanism for upgrading base. The issue at > hand seems to be that the current approach changes the default freebsd > upgrade policy in a significant way.
