From owner-svn-ports-all@freebsd.org Fri May 22 08:44:35 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78DFB32A61C; Fri, 22 May 2020 08:44:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [96.47.72.132]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "freefall.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49T0R72hRJz415c; Fri, 22 May 2020 08:44:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@freebsd.org) Received: by freefall.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 47DE54AE7; Fri, 22 May 2020 08:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 08:44:35 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Kurt Jaeger Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r536118 - in head/www: . fusionpbx fusionpbx/files Message-ID: <20200522084435.GA36479@FreeBSD.org> References: <202005211139.04LBdLuq025958@repo.freebsd.org> <20200522080538.GA31738@FreeBSD.org> <20200522083349.GI4667@fc.opsec.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200522083349.GI4667@fc.opsec.eu> X-BeenThere: svn-ports-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 08:44:35 -0000 On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 10:33:49AM +0200, Kurt Jaeger wrote: > > ... > > Looks like this port had been in the tree before. Why was it > > readded as a new port rather than repocopied as due? > > Two reasons: > > 1) I was not aware that it was in the tree before that > 2) As far as I understand, we plan to move to git, so > the history will be lost anyway ? If git does not support repocopies, it pretty much means we cannot switch to it, which is very good news! > If 2) is not true, I can re-add with a repo-copy. I'd appreciate it you do it; if not, I can also do it myself. ./danfe