Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 13:29:01 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/bind9 - Imported sources Message-ID: <20040920182901.GA40865@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <20040920181903.GB95778@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200409190130.i8J1UPZN059043@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040920174914.GA91871@dragon.nuxi.com> <20040920140744.163da930@localhost> <20040920181903.GB95778@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 11:19:03AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > This should have been discussed in public if we were to break with 8 > years of standard operating practice. You need to come up with a better argument than "we did it that way for 8 years". > How long is src/contrib/bind going to stick around? Why does it need to > exist at the same time as src/contrib/bind9? BIND 9 is a completely different code base than BIND 8. Importing BIND 9 over BIND 8 would be very confusing from the point of view of CVS history. BIND 8 will be with the 4.x branch for a long time still (e.g. I'm projecting May 2006 before we stop issuing security advisories for 4.x). It is very welcome that there will not be entangled/interleaved history between FreeBSD 4.x/BIND 8 commits and FreeBSD 5.x/BIND 9 commits. Out of the 1,189 BIND 8 files and 2,100 BIND 9 files, there are only 8 files that are in the same place. It would cause a confusing mess to import this over src/contrib/bind and it would offer no benefit that I can see. Cheers, -- Jacques A Vidrine / NTT/Verio nectar@celabo.org / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040920182901.GA40865>