Re: [CFT] packaging the base system with pkg(8)

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon_at_orthanc.ca> wrote:

> 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.
>

*THAT* is the tone I was complaining about. This is not at all respectful.
How can we have a rational discussion with people talking about "all glory
to" this or that? I don't think it is possible. I get the point you are
trying to make, but it is being made so poorly that I have to point that
out. You don't get people to come to a table by being disrespectful and
demanding their presence. I sit at whatever table I choose to sit at. You
have to convince me to sit, not demand that I sit. I haven't responded well
to that since the 70's, and I'm ill inclined to start now. Yelling and
screaming isn't going to do it. Jumping up and down isn't going to do it.
Nobody wants to chat with the mob carrying pitch forks and torches. People
do want to talk to rational people having rational discussions perhaps with
a point of view that differs from their own. You can scream all you want,
but I doubt it will get the results you want.


> 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.


That is understood. Being toxic about it isn't going to help. Being
disrespectful is not going to help. Being hyperbolic isn't going to help.
It isn't a real conversation until that stuff is gone. So far I've seen no
evidence of it being gone.

I've met personally with Glen, in person. I had a wonderful chat with him.
Based on talking to him, it was clear many of the complaints here were
overblown. Are there rough edges? Yes. Are there things we don't know? Yes.
Is it the end of the world? No. Over the coming weeks, things will get
easier. The rough edges will be sanded off. After talking with him, I have
complete confidence in him and others that are working on making this
happen. I don't need it to be perfect today, because of this confidence.

I personally will be refraining from engaging further. I plan on seeing
what gaps there are by adding support to NanoBSD for packages. I'll be busy
with that. In talking to Glen and others, we've already identified a few
easy gaps to fill. Once they've done that, I'll get going on NanoBSD with
the goal to be able to use it to build a bootable system of any
architecture from packages with no root privs. I expect to find issues, but
I don't expect to find any issue that's intractable. I expect after the
issues are resolved, the end product will be better for everybody.

Warner