[FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD 5.1 Released!

[Marcel Moolenaar]

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 05:38:12PM -0400, Ken Smith wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 02:20:22PM -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> 
> > I'm not a mirror operator (IANAMO? :-) and I just recently
> > entered the playground by providing the ia64 release bits and
> > snapshots, but I can truely say that I'm amazed by how
> > unstructured this all is. So, in that respect I don't think
> > you're wrong.
> 
> I've been watching for a while longer than you.  I could be wrong and
> if I am I truly apologize to who this is likely to offend but...  I
> don't think there is anyone other than the RE team that dabbles in
> the structure of the mirror system, and they only do it when it's
> close to release time.

I tend to support you here. From the 6 months that I'm on the hubs@
list it's clear that release time is when all "hell" breaks loose.
People who are otherwise uninterested (like me -- sorry) have to be
part of "it" by providing bits and that's a common source for friction,
misunderstanding and irritation.

> I sorta noticed the apparent lack of a coordinator and sorta offered
> to help but haven't been told if they're interested.  They might have
> other plans in the works and didn't need the help (or had someone else
> in mind with better qualifications... :-).

I may be stepping on toes here, but what about just taking control?

Why not own this problem among the mirror operators and tell those
weenies who upload to ftp-master to shut up and do as they're told?

Put differently: I have a very simply perspective on this: I don't
know what I'm talking about and I don't want to. All I want is some
guidelines, procedures and/or tools so that I can provide the bits I
want to provide in whatever way you want me to provide them and then
get on with my work.
I think it's not unrealistic to have this simplistic perspective
apply to almost everybody who merely provides bits, including to,
in big parts, re@ and kris@ (where kris stands for everything related
to packages :-). Of course different bits require different handling,
but that's in my point of view mostly your problem, not mine.
In return for this power, I only ask predictability and consistency
so that there's a way for users (and me) to know where and when the
bits are expected to be accessable.

Is this too naive a viewpoint?

-- 
 Marcel Moolenaar	  USPA: A-39004		 marcel at xcllnt.net