Re: [HEADSUP & CFT] pkg 1.0rc1 and schedule

On 07/13/2012 05:26 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday, July 12, 2012 5:16:41 pm Doug Barton wrote:
>> On 07/12/2012 02:11 PM, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>>> You might want to view Baptiste's pkgng presentation at BSDCan:
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Hxq7AHZ27I
>>
>> Sure, the next time I have an hour to spare.
>>
>> I don't think what I'm asking for is unreasonable. One could even
>> conclude that answering those 3 questions should have been a
>> prerequisite for starting down this road in the first place.
> 
> One could also assume that other people in the Project aren't morons and do 
> actually put thought into the things they do for starters

I certainly *want* to believe that. But considering the giant mess that
portmgr + Baptiste made of the changes to the OPTIONS framework, that
only touches a fraction of the ports, my willingness to have faith in
"them" to do it right is near zero.

Not to mention that I've been asking for a project plan for pkg since
long before it even hit the ports tree in beta. What I'm asking for
should have been done already considering that this change will affect
*every* port, and *every* user. So either it hasn't actually been done,
or the PTB are refusing to provide it.

Also, please keep in mind that I was criticized for *not* speaking up
about the OPTIONS changes, now I'm being criticized *for* speaking up
prior to pkg going live. In spite of the fact that I'm doing my best to
(repeatedly) be clear that I'm not against the project, I just want to
know more about it.

> Also, when other 
> people have taken time to explain an large decision because you are too lazy 
> to invest the time doesn't really help your case).

Um, I'm too lazy? I've read everything that's been written on pkg to
date. Have you? 90% of it is "how to" type stuff that doesn't address
what we need. The other 10% is so vague and general as to be useless as
a project plan.

You're an experienced project manager John. If someone who worked for
you came to you with a plan this vague ("modern" foo, "decent" bar), for
a critical system, how would you respond? (And yes, I realize that no
one around here works for me, that isn't my point at all.)

> In terms of the first feature (binary upgrades), the truth is that if you have 
> more than 5 machines to manage, our current pkg tools completely suck.  There 
> is no automated upgrade mechanism.  If you want one you have to write your own 
> set of infrastructure to do the right collection of pkg_delete/pkg_adds.  
> Certainly there is no support in the current package tools for doing batch 
> upgrades (i.e. upgrading from one completely package set to another).  pkgng 
> adds that feature, and I find it a must for supporting large installations of 
> machines that need automated management.

And as I wrote previously, I've been there and done that, so yes, I'm
interested in the feature. But I'd like to know more about the plans for
it so that those of us who *do* have experience in this topic can share
that, and we can avoid having to reinvent the wheel. Or worse, putting
out something half-assed that uses up a lot of developer cycles and
doesn't get the job done.

Doug