From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 12 06:36:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B604F16A4CE; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 06:36:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from gw.celabo.org (gw.celabo.org [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C3543D1F; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 06:36:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (verified OK)) by gw.celabo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17668548A4; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:36:50 -0600 (CST) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9890D6D455; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:36:49 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 08:36:49 -0600 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: Peter Schultz Message-ID: <20040212143649.GA20602@madman.celabo.org> References: <1076508074.88428.14.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <20040211122704.X93022@blues.jpj.net> <20040211165940.Q98525@blues.jpj.net> <20040212031228.E31447@blues.jpj.net> <20040212102842.GC3148@FreeBSD.org> <402B7AFA.8040606@mindspring.com> <402B8376.7060206@bis.midco.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <402B8376.7060206@bis.midco.net> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i-ja.1 cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: branches [was: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/firefox Makefile distinfo pkg-descrpkg-message mozconfig.in patch-Double.cpp patch-build_unix_run-mozilla] X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 14:36:50 -0000 On Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 07:45:26AM -0600, Peter Schultz wrote: > Are there stable and current branches of the ports tree? I wouldn't > think so, because then I don't think there'd have to be such a critical > ports freeze. Having a better audited ports tree would be nice, like > the other day when on of nectar's security patches to gaim got blown away. No, there are no branches for the ports tree. In the past I've considered having `security branches' for a *SMALL SUBSET* of the ports tree. If there were such a thing, it wouldn't include gaim :-), only widely-used server applications. But, there are a few problems (for me) in making that happen. Among them: Picking the subset. Agreement would be nigh impossible. Actually building packages, particularly for non-x86 and for older branches. Time. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine NTT/Verio SME FreeBSD UNIX Heimdal nectar@celabo.org jvidrine@verio.net nectar@freebsd.org nectar@kth.se