> Hasn't this been discussed before?
> 
> I think the issues were:
> 1) Precompiled ports will be *huge* due to the number of NetBSD platforms, so
>    builds will probably have to be done on the user's machine. 

"disk is cheap these days, so more can fit."


> 2) Nobody could agree on where "stuff" should get installed. Do binaries
>    go in /usr/local/bin or /usr/local/PKGNAME/bin, with a link in
> /usr/local/bin? What about the oddball case where somebody wants to do
>    something different*? Who dislikes /opt/BLAHblah/*?

No, nobody who wanted to bicker about it could agree.  The vast
majority of users don't _care_ as long as it's someplace at least
somewhat intuitive.

I'd say that the person who's doing the work should decide, or, better
yet, we should do what somebody's already doing, especially if we can
use their work to do it.


> 3) Many packages have lots of configuration options. How do you select which
>    options should be used? Ease of changing these options? Is a GUI/CUI
>    needed for this?

This is a real problem, but certainly this can't be any harder than
people having to compile the binaries _and_ configure them!


> 4) Satisfying all of these issues becomes a pain in the arse for the person 
>    who creates the package -> fewer packages are created.

Actually, i'd say that somebody (with time and energy) should Just Do
It with the package stuff.  There's been evidence of support from
'core' on this in the past, and if somebody gets it going and lays
down the ground rules, it'll likely go somewhere.

If i'm given a way to easily build binaries and a place to put the
results, I know that i'd build alpha binaries and my users would be
all the better off for it.


cgd