Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 13:08:41 +0100 (MET) From: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de (Martin Cracauer) To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de, mbarkah@hemi.com, deischen@iworks.InterWorks.org, www@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD GNATS-related CGI scripts Message-ID: <9701041208.AA23640@wavehh.hanse.de> In-Reply-To: <26064.852374818@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 4, 97 02:46:58 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > What's the police to add things to the CVS tree? I feel a bit > > uncomfortable to add masses of CGIs to the CVS repository that gets > > distributed to all people who really want the FreeBSD source > > tree. Maybe keeping www/ and src/ in the same CVS tree is not the > > right thing to do in the long term? > > This isn't a problem at all. Our CVS repository is split into 3 > different parts: src, ports and www. You don't get them all in one > piece, so if you don't want www then you simply don't have to take it. > Easy. Please, feel free to use the www sub-collection as it was > meant to be used! ;-) At least CTM delivers the full repository. Will take your advice nothingtheless, I hope John will speak up regarding the other scripts. Currently, a move of a CGI script to the CVS tree requires all references to it from WWW pages to be updated. What was the original reason not to put all CGIs in the same directory? When we get to-be-compiled CGIs, we'll have to use some more complicated mechanism than just checkout into the working dir of Apache anyway. Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@wavehh.hanse.de> http://cracauer.cons.org Fax +49 40 522 85 36
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9701041208.AA23640>