Nachdem Hiten Pandya auf der kernel-Mailingliste des Projektes den Wunsch geäußert hatte, doch bitte die Entscheidung über ein neues Paketmanagement (u.a. war apt im Gespräch) zu vertagen, da das Release mit der Versionsnummer 1.0 in nächster Zeit anstehe, meldeten sich einige weitere Listenteilnehmer zu Wort und bestätigten diesen Wunsch, auch um den mittlerweile aufkeimenden Flamewars entgegenzuwirken.
Hier im englischen Original die Ursprungsmail:
<zitat>
The package system discussions should be halted for now; as it seems,
that every time the subject is brought up, it ends up with mounds of
discussion and gets nowhere.
I think for now, we should be concentrating on getting the core of the
userland up-to-date and adding support for asynchronous system calls and
giving libc the kick that is needs; user-land threading etc.
In my opinio; and I am sure others agree with me here; the package
system is the *least* of our concerns right now. DragonFly needs to
have a distinct difference from its ancestor (heh, dont take it
figuratively); slapping a new package system and changing name is not
helping us achieve that for now.
Granted, we have written a lot of kernel pieces and new functionality,
but from a common user's perspective, we are not that much different
from FreeBSD-4; we need to change this perspective.
So, please, no bikesheds and long discussions on this topic; they can be
halted for now.
</zitat>
Hier im englischen Original die Ursprungsmail:
<zitat>
The package system discussions should be halted for now; as it seems,
that every time the subject is brought up, it ends up with mounds of
discussion and gets nowhere.
I think for now, we should be concentrating on getting the core of the
userland up-to-date and adding support for asynchronous system calls and
giving libc the kick that is needs; user-land threading etc.
In my opinio; and I am sure others agree with me here; the package
system is the *least* of our concerns right now. DragonFly needs to
have a distinct difference from its ancestor (heh, dont take it
figuratively); slapping a new package system and changing name is not
helping us achieve that for now.
Granted, we have written a lot of kernel pieces and new functionality,
but from a common user's perspective, we are not that much different
from FreeBSD-4; we need to change this perspective.
So, please, no bikesheds and long discussions on this topic; they can be
halted for now.
</zitat>