On 23/6/17 7:28 am, Grzegorz Junka wrote:
On 22/06/2017 15:50, scratch65...@att.net wrote:
[Default] On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:38:53 +0100, Matthew Seaman
<matt...@freebsd.org> wrote:
On 2017/06/22 15:03, scratch65...@att.net wrote:
Why don't the same choices apply here? What am I missing?
Two things:
1) It's progress in the development of the FreeBSD base system that
drives the release cycle. The general state of the ports does not
exert
much influence on release frequency -- nor should it.
Still not getting it, I'm afraid. How often does the base
system undergo such drastic architecture changes that existing
ports won't run under it? I haven't really been monitoring the
situation, but I'd guess it's very seldom if only because such an
architectural change is a cursëd big job that can hardly ever be
justfied.
I'd guess that most adults for whom systems are tools not toys
are not too dissimilar to me: I want to *use* my tools, not
spend time replacing them every quarter or even every year. As
long as they do the job and don't compromise the system, they're
fine by me. I have apps running under Win7 that were written for
W2K (and in one case NT, iirc), and they're just as useful today
as they were then. They do the job: why in the name of sanity
should I replace them?
Not sure how you use your tools or in which industry you work. Take
front-end development for example.
here lies the crux of the problem.
FreeBSD is often not a front-end software module.
It is often used to provision off-line (from a
management/administrative perspective) systems.
Front end or personal systems can be upgraded day by day.
Real products such as routers, proxies, gateways, accounting systems,
firewalls etc. can NOT be upgraded every day.
you are lucky if the customer allows you to do it once a year.
Chrome is releasing a new version every couple of days. Sure, I
don't upgrade every release, but when I am developing a website, I
want to test using the same version that my customers are using,
which is the latest, since Chrome on Windows updates itself
automatically. The same with new versions of Firefox. Often new
versions of browsers require new versions of libraries to support
new features (CSS/JavaScript). That requires new versions of
compiler and transpilers. They may, in turn, require an updated
version of node or npm.
Take server-side development as another example. Erlang is releasing
a new version of OTP every couple of weeks. Sure, I don't need a new
version when supporting an old application, but I may need one when
starting a new application. Especially that many libraries that I am
going to use won't support Erlang older than a specific version.
A similar story with C++ development, where the standard is being
constantly developed and compilers are adding these features every
release. Again, you may not need these new features, but a library
that you need to use may require the new version.
No matter how long you are going to maintain a specific version of
ports with locked down versions of applications, there will surely
come a time when you will need to upgrade. And for every user that
time will be different. The current model is in my opinion the most
common denominator - we can't maintain multiple branches with past
versions so lets try to properly maintain one with current versions.
Grzegorz
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"