From owner-freebsd-current Sun Mar 17 17:29:15 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874E437B400; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:29:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id g2I1Suk16990; Sun, 17 Mar 2002 20:28:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 20:28:55 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Terry Lambert Cc: Garance A Drosihn , Murray Stokely , obrien@FreeBSD.ORG, sobomax@FreeBSD.ORG, re@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADS UP: -CURRENT Feature Slush is OVER In-Reply-To: <3C953CC4.CF751B81@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Terry Lambert wrote: > Garance A Drosihn wrote: > > At 1:15 AM -0800 3/17/02, Murray Stokely wrote: > > >On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 01:08:43AM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > > >> Minimally, pick a date, and then do a CVS diff against that > > >> date, and include it on the CDROM. > > > > > > I would be happy to do this. I checked out a copy of the CVS tree > > >right before we made the Perforce branch so that we could tag it later > > >if absolutely necessary. > > > > I think this is a good and useful idea. Thanks. > > Yes, thanks, Murray. Without something like this, I think the CDROM > will be worse than useless. One reason for deciding to abandon the original CVS idea was that the release engineering team was informed that there were on-going repocopies/removes/renames that would result in tagging causing long term problems. I.e., there's stuff in the repository that is destined to "magically disappear" since it's never hit a stable branch (beta versions of compilers and so on. In tagging the tree, we'd be (in essence) asserting that those transient bits of history would stick around to make the tag useful later. I don't mind tagging the tree with the understanding that if you check it out later, it will be known not to build due to a missing compiler, as long as people understand that. :-) Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message