Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 08:20:24 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> To: jkh@osd.bsdi.com (Jordan Hubbard) Cc: rwatson@FreeBSD.org, nik@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/examples/cvsup standard-supfile Message-ID: <200104121520.IAA42014@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <20010411225121L.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> from Jordan Hubbard at "Apr 11, 2001 10:51:21 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I partially support you in this possition! Looking back (hind sight is always 20-20) I would have rather seen standard-supfile nuked than the change that actually went in due to the new bug it creates in the README file, and the fact that tring to untwist it and maintain it is not going to be easy. > I still think all this contraversy could be avoided if we simply nuked > the *-supfiles and replaced them with a simple Q&A script which > configured the target cvsupfile after asking the user some questions. The other supfiles are branch independent, and have never caused us any problems from the user base so don't nuke all of them, it is really just the standard-supfile that has caused us grief over the years, so please, don't toss the baby with the dirty bath water.... > /usr/ports/net/cvsupit/pkg-install wouldn't be a bad place to start, > with some small tweaks to include the new and upcoming "release > branch" and perhaps give the user a bit more background information on > the options they're chosing. I have meetings for the rest of the week > or I'd do it myself. :( And update the README to point to it :-) -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104121520.IAA42014>