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

>> 
> 
> *THAT* is the tone I was complaining about. This is not at all respectful.
> 



Respect is a two way street. If you want respect, offer yours.  We make our point  very  poorly, I get you, but it is the result of  what you and others from the projectdo. Meaning, 0 communication. I dont know if that  means 0 communications skills,or you do not communicate on purpose. You as a member  of the core team, should be one of the first to address this problem. 

After all you the core invested time in code of conducts and other things of  questionable value, but at the same time you always avoid to clearly communicate  with your user base.

> 've met personally with Glen, in person. I had a wonderful chat with him.

Maybe you did. We did not. Serious mechanism issues regarding pkg went  unanswered on the other list. Look on pkg list, very rational, polite, and to  the subject, 100% rational message about pkg base which is not responded. So, you complain about tone, and how helpful  would  be for ppl to change it. Let me give you a suggestion: start with altering your own behaviour. Offer  respect, be communicative, less sensible on internet where it is very hard to convey “tone”. You'll see that it works wonders to indirectly alter the  behaviour of the people you so eloquently compared to peasants daring to disturb the lord of the castle.



You says that everything will be OK. I want to  believe you. But giving the track record  VIMAGE has, and how many gugs go on and on with years  Im not so sure that you guys wont do the same with this subsystem,  and leave it with rough edges for half a decade.  Because we all know that everything will be OK in the end. Timeframe is also important.




> 
> 
>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"