From owner-freebsd-hubs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 15 10:09:03 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6244037B401 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:09:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.32.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4DE43F75 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 10:09:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU) Received: from electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (kensmith@localhost [127.0.0.1]) h6FH90br017219; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kensmith@localhost) by electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h6FH90nc017218; Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 13:09:00 -0400 From: Ken Smith To: =?unknown-8bit?Q?Jo=E3o_Carlos_Mendes_Lu=EDs?= Message-ID: <20030715170900.GR11840@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> References: <20030712173332.GB14686@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <20030715140016.GA11840@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <3F14147F.2010706@jonny.eng.br> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3F14147F.2010706@jonny.eng.br> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org cc: Ken Smith Subject: Re: Mirror Site Requirements... X-BeenThere: freebsd-hubs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Distributions Hubs: mail sup ftp List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 17:09:03 -0000 On Tue, Jul 15, 2003 at 11:49:35AM -0300, Joo Carlos Mendes Lus wrote: > >On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 01:33:32PM -0400, Ken Smith wrote: > >The question he raised was whether requiring the packages as part > >of being a Tier-2 was necessary. Using the 5.1 release as an example > >what I proposed as the Tier-2 requirements was that they carry: > > > > releases/i386/5.1-RELEASE/ > > ports/i386/packages-5.1-release/ > > > >I don't think it's necessary for them to carry the -current packages. > > You mean that only the packages from the lastest stable release is > needed at tier-2, right? Considering the -packages growth, I don't > think we can force a tier-2 to carry more than one set... Sorry - yes. I'm having problems mapping directory names into something useful for this conversation. They should carry: ports/i386/packages-5.1-release/ and should not be *required* to carry: ports/i386/packages-5-current/ -- Ken Smith - From there to here, from here to | kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu there, funny things are everywhere. | - Theodore Geisel |