> On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Witold Wnuk wrote:
> > What do you think? Does it make sense?
> 
> IMHO, no. Too much effort to keep "developer" and enduser version apart,
> and the endusers will sooner or later switch back to the developer version
> anyways, for a number of reasons. If our endusers want a single file per
> pkg, that's what we have binary packages for.
However this scheme suits _my_ needs very well. I'm interested in having 
access to sources, I'm interested in having possibility to update Makefile to 
use newer version of program quickly, I run -current. Otherwise I would 
probably use binary packages. On the other hand I'm not creating/hacking 
packages (although I have submited package once or twice) so I don't need full 
sources ready 24*7. I believe many NetBSD users fall in this category.


> This proposal is intended to reduce the number of inodes by a simple way,
;-) I've considered your proposal very complex, especially if you choose b) 
procedure (keeping revision history would be very nice indeed).

> what you propose is complex enough to bear enough errors that it needs
> more time than we (I) have right now, and I think we should do that in
> another step, IF need arises.
> 
> For now, one step at a time.
Ok, I will look further if I can present working proposal for your 
consideration (hopefully someday soon).


Greetings,


	Witold J. Wnuk