Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:34:15 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: Ultima <ultima1252@gmail.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Advise requested when a repo split occurs Message-ID: <580DE3A7.3080908@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <CANJ8om5eVd6bFQ1rpPTc_kLjgaF-H-aNAZOT-YNsvZfQ5tuiBA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CANJ8om5eVd6bFQ1rpPTc_kLjgaF-H-aNAZOT-YNsvZfQ5tuiBA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ultima wrote on 2016/10/22 21:14: > Hello, > > Some what recently a couple of the ports I maintain split into two, one > being -server, and the other being -client. The code was more or less > cloned then removed some make args/files that one would be used to enable > both. > > Currently the code is so similar it would be possible to create a slave > port and use the same patches, makefile and plist with minimal changes, > however I have no idea the direction this split may go and this maybe short > lived. So onto my topic for this post. > > Would it be better to create a new port with mostly duplicate code and > remove/add the little changes required? Or as previously stated make a > slave port and use the common code. > > I am struggling to decide on this and would appreciate opinions. I think it is fine to use slave port first. See some databases like MySQL or PostgreSQL. When server and client will diverge too much in the future, you can rework it as too separate ports. Miroslav Lachman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?580DE3A7.3080908>