Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 17:31:55 +0300 From: Gleb Popov <arrowd@freebsd.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Release Engineering Team <re@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Renaming "FreeBSD" repo in /etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf to "FreeBSD-ports" Message-ID: <CALH631n6M7_9i1820fNaOApMr2E=BFZbaA2m%2B06pgjYPuw3faQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7c48e14d-b463-4523-8610-e18ac99f3381@FreeBSD.org> References: <5d2daa68-cd27-4a56-9d69-5453b588a086@freebsd.org> <CALH631=AVBRRAe4qOZ2W22h-M=ZtWiSYtho54of-iOhhjBq36Q@mail.gmail.com> <7c48e14d-b463-4523-8610-e18ac99f3381@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 5:22 PM John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On 8/20/25 01:54, Gleb Popov wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 1:49 AM Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> > >> To reduce long-term confusion, I'm intending to rename the "FreeBSD" > >> repository to "FreeBSD-ports", and similarly rename "FreeBSD-kmods" to > >> "FreeBSD-ports-kmods". > > > > Having "ports" in the repository name does not make sense to me at > > all. Ports are recipes to produce packages, but there are more ways (I > > know at least one) to create a pkg package. > > But the packages in that repo are generated by FreeBSD ports? Yes, they are. Ok, if we're going full bikeshedding mode then I think that repos should be named after what they represent rather than from what they are built. That is, - FreeBSD packages - FreeBSD base packages - FreeBSD kernel modules All right, maybe "FreeBSD packages" looks like a superset of the latter two, so we can call it "FreeBSD main packages", which aligns nicely with "FreeBSD quarterly packages". > > >> It defines a "FreeBSD" pkg repository which is in fact specifically bits > >> maintained *outside* of FreeBSD (and packaged via the ports tree). > > > > Can't agree with this either. FreeBSD Ports are maintained *inside* > > the project as well as package building and hosting infrastructure. It > > feels perfectly fine to have a single configuration file named after > > the *vendor*, which provides multiple repos maintained by that vendor. > > What if people only wish to use pkg.freebsd.org for base but not ports > or vice versa? User can disable whatever repository he wants, it has nothing to do in what config file this repo is declared.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CALH631n6M7_9i1820fNaOApMr2E=BFZbaA2m%2B06pgjYPuw3faQ>