Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:35:40 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ability for maintainers to update own ports Message-ID: <20031111183540.GA26599@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <73E9F604-1472-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com> References: <1068458390.38101.19.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110152000.622db381.lehmann@ans-netz.de> <1068471598.38101.77.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20031110163623.GC93583@procyon.firepipe.net> <1068495958.690.72.camel@leguin> <53EC784E-13C5-11D8-AD24-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <3FB00E53.8060603@fillmore-labs.com> <20031111021929.GA17050@xor.obsecurity.org> <73E9F604-1472-11D8-BD31-003065ABFD92@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 01:11:21PM -0500, Charles Swiger wrote: > Branching ports might help out people who try to update their ports=20 > while running older versions of FreeBSD (yes, I understand that=20 > supporting older versions is at a low priority, but this would address=20 > some user expectations/complaints), and it might smooth "cataclysmic=20 > events" involving changes to the ports infrastructure, changes to=20 > -CURRENT which break lots of ports, etc. I'm not interested in supporting old releases..it's too much work. More broadly speaking, there doesn't seem to be significant interest from the community to provide support for old releases. If there was, it's something that could be provided by a group of interested members of this list. > However, I'm not sure we need to branch the ports CVS repository to=20 > address these issues: what happens if we use CVS tags to indicate which= =20 > OS versions and/or hardware architectures a port works on? There's no way that we can reasonably guarantee that tagged ports will work together (e.g. what happens when a dependency changes?), so tagging has minimal benefit. We already provide this level of minimal support for people who want to try to mix and match old ports, namely people can use cvs to manage their ports tree and update ports to whichever CVS revision they like. > One could then have successful builds on bento perform the tagging > in an automated fashion. That's not really feasible. Kris --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/sSv8Wry0BWjoQKURAlo7AKD3ygTowWdbm+5BbKXEJMc6DuXs1ACgrRpR 7zbDnrVbeSlTdlUKpq2FPRI= =1h/e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031111183540.GA26599>