From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 23 17:12:57 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 818BA50F for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:12:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from mail-ie0-x234.google.com (mail-ie0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::234]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CD391664 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:12:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f180.google.com with SMTP id f4so23165047iea.11 for ; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:12:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=RYwZQy1WRcNfFXFjDhSiuWdYY2vEapqM4ww2w9Zb6Ko=; b=CdYFHHNdzcFMNfUjfGVwW8nx35SQGiyl9SGaMIgD1IejlxPS66/ucPUOw3wZJsqCSy BaDbf1nU//kvuEK+QAdd7994SLp/vL7/aGiqk+wMDKVdT+kJniK1P/micrxDEAEeT+KH +udntPjUTxYueLidbcsbBmeWk4lPeDEj8CQzf0omsKJXOqBH4v6idM3q0uM8i3p/I1sd YDlxF/6jjtiEMfWXE/x/Zt3H27IK6wC3I9j+57zmnjSxQheNuL4XPj7if9AqUeiCQIfs PvJq+B0HUN0sYmL0vqbLGOZcdl7G1Vu76egf7ULkhJ8bKbkQL0Uh3A/0Vc4dVWz80U2h VBdw== X-Received: by 10.50.101.16 with SMTP id fc16mr1007996igb.49.1372007576977; Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 53.imp.bsdimp.com (50-78-194-198-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.194.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nm17sm9453881igb.5.2013.06.23.10.12.54 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Warner Losh Subject: Re: svn commit: r251886 - in head: contrib/apr contrib/apr-util contrib/serf contrib/sqlite3 contrib/subversion share/mk usr.bin usr.bin/svn usr.bin/svn/lib usr.bin/svn/lib/libapr usr.bin/svn/lib/libap... Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Warner Losh In-Reply-To: <51C6E89A.6060407@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:12:53 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3E89DDCB-38FA-4E7C-8F03-461516DD1871@bsdimp.com> References: <201306180253.r5I2rj45053959@svn.freebsd.org> <11DA3D8A-AD20-4DE1-B807-D09814F61947@bsdimp.com> <51C1C7BD.9060201@FreeBSD.org> <201306191113.29703.jhb@freebsd.org> <8D00BE2B-FD8E-4E7B-B818-1C4B7F6BB6A5@bsdimp.com> <68D70A89-22F2-412C-BAF4-72BEFE21EB2F@bsdimp.com> <51C5EF15.10305@FreeBSD.org> <51C660D9.8080804@FreeBSD.org> <51C6E89A.6060407@FreeBSD.org> To: Tijl Coosemans X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmVkNUyl5W6zqApa0LYdTKE8XFdXAglXmEc8lehZ/FgkpjYw+AvJ8z2ShqHiGgW6DBmffGd Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andre Oppermann , Peter Wemm , John Baldwin , svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, David Chisnall , Garance A Drosehn , svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:12:57 -0000 On Jun 23, 2013, at 6:22 AM, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On 2013-06-23 04:43, Garance A Drosehn wrote: >> On 6/22/13 2:38 PM, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >>> On 2013-06-20 21:34, Warner Losh wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> I think insisting on a definitive statement on svn lite's mission >>>> statement is a way to obstruct progress. Sometimes you just need to >>>> things because they feel right, not because they have been through = a >>>> 20-step approval process... >>>=20 >>> For what it's worth, my reservations have always been because it >>> didn't feel right. I never asked for an approval process. >>>=20 >>> I do think there should be a tool in base that can fetch source >>> updates and it would be nice if it could roll back changes and >>> even nicer if it could do bisects. But svn itself is not the >>> right tool for that. >>>=20 >>> For instance, will you allow that svn is updated from version x.y >>> to x.(y+1) in a stable branch? If yes, then users might have to run >>> run "svn upgrade" which is a one way process, so how does importing >>> svn allow you to roll back changes or do bisects then? If no, then >>> who's volunteering to backport security fixes? >>=20 >> What was added to the base system was 'svnlite', not 'svn' from >> the official subversion project. The distinction is that >> 'svnlite' is a version meant only for access to the official >> FreeBSD repositories. 'svnlite' in the base system would only >> be upgraded when it is needed to match the FreeBSD respository. >> And if you need to run 'svn upgrade' to access the FreeBSD >> repository, then it doesn't make much difference if you have >> to do that with 'svnlite' or via the official 'svn' port. >>=20 >> I'm not sure that my comments provide an answer to what you're >> concerned about, but anyone who wants the latest version of >> 'svn' to match their own repositories is still going to need >> to install the port. We're not going to blindly update >> 'svnlite' every time a new version of 'svn' is released. >> 'svnlite' is going to be updated on *FreeBSD*'s schedule, >> not on the schedule of the subversion project. >>=20 >> It is true that we're going to have to be careful when it does >> come time to switch to some new repo-format for the FreeBSD >> repository. We might find ourselves in some kind of chicken- >> and-egg situation at that point. And when we do make a >> significant upgrade to the FreeBSD repository, then we're >> going to have to upgrade 'svnlite' across multiple FreeBSD >> branches at the same time, including all -stable branches. >> But when that issue comes up it'll come up on our schedule, >> because we'll control both 'svnlite' and the FreeBSD repo. >=20 > It is precisely the other way around. Once you do a FreeBSD release > (releng branch) that release will be stuck with the same version of > svnlite for years. You will end up with multiple releases with > multiple versions of svnlite that you cannot change. You have zero > control. Then they will never have to do svn update, since their checked out tree = will never be obsolete in relationship to the version that's installed. > A port on the other hand is the same for all branches and releases > of FreeBSD. It is a single point where you have total control over > the version of svn for all users. Conceptually, a port corresponds > to the fact all branches and releases share the same subversion > repo. Except that you still need to do svn update on trees that are checked = out from old repos. I'm having a real hard time seeing this as an issue based on my = experience with the svn port since we made the switch. Then again, I've = been talking to the svn repo over http, which is independent of the = version of the repo on the other end... Warner=