Date: Thu, 02 Apr 1998 05:23:27 -0800 From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: obrien@NUXI.com Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-distrib@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: distrib/cvsup/sup README distrib/cvsup/sup/doc-all releases list.cvs.en distrib/cvsup/sup/www releases list.cvs.en list.cvs.text Message-ID: <199804021323.FAA03420@austin.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 31 Mar 1998 19:39:16 PST." <19980331193916.63457@nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > stuff either. Again, these files are easy for clients to block > > in their "refuse" files. > > But we do have say "ports-lang" in addition to "ports-all". This > could also be added to the refuse file. > > Thus can "doc-all" also be offered in its componates? These being > doc-handbook, doc-faq, doc-ja? I don't object in principle. We'd need "doc-base" too, to pick up the Makefile. I also have been persuaded that subcollections to separate out the language-specific parts (e.g., Japanese versions) are becoming more important all the time. I just want a chance to organize it in a way that will be consistent across the board, and that scales reasonably well. Once a collection exists, it's virtually impossible to eliminate it or to reshuffle its contents without causing disruption (mass file deletions) for users. In particular, there's no painless way to migrate a set of files from one collection into another one. So it pays to get it right the first time. Taking care of this is on my white board, and if you'll bear with me a little bit longer, I'll get it done. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Self-knowledge is always bad news." -- John Barth
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199804021323.FAA03420>