Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 20:10:59 +1100 (EST) From: Andrew Reilly <areilly@bigpond.net.au> To: roam@orbitel.bg Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Integration of ports and 3rd party anoncvs repositories? Message-ID: <200012210911.UAA13803@sr14.nsw-remote.bigpond.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20001221110058.A2990@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21 Dec, Peter Pentchev wrote: > Mmm.. I might be wrong here, but wouldn't tracking the CVS versions > require nightly, if not hourly, test builds from the port maintainer > to make sure that ongoing commits do not interfere with local patches? Oh, no. I didn't intend to imply that the ports system should be capable of working with arbitrary checkouts. That would be very unlikely indeed. I think that ports would usually just follow tagged releases, as they do now. They still have to work with the tarball releases, after all. No, I was just suggesting that, come release time, a "cvs co -rFOO_TAG" might result in lower download time/space than grabbing the entire tarball. I guess that there could easily be room, then, for super-keen port maintaners to have a separate -nightly version of the port, but even that would have to be based on a time-stamped check-out. It also doesn't seem terribly likely for the bhemoths that I was initially thinking about, either. -- Andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012210911.UAA13803>