From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Fri Jun 23 09:47:50 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1340CDA0B25
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 23 Jun 2017 09:47:50 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from vlad-fbsd@acheronmedia.com)
Received: from mx.irealone.hr (xoth.irealone.hr [136.243.79.146])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C08D97F2A6
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 09:47:48 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from vlad-fbsd@acheronmedia.com)
Received: by mx.irealone.hr (Postfix, from userid 58)
 id F0D44460E; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:47:43 +0200 (CEST)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on
 postfix.xoth.irealone.hr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00,
 LOCAL_WL_002 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
Received: from mail.irealone.com (unknown [10.0.0.10])
 by mx.irealone.hr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4575F460A
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:47:43 +0200 (CEST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 11:47:43 +0200
From: "Vlad K." <vlad-fbsd@acheronmedia.com>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version
Organization: Acheron Media
In-Reply-To: <1498210501.2506.6.camel@gmail.com>
References: <CAO+PfDeFz1JeSwU3f21Waz3nT2LTSDAvD+8MSPRCzgM_0pKGnA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net>
 <dahnkctsm1elbaqlarl8b9euouaplqk2tv@4ax.com>
 <20170622141644.yadxdubynuhzygcy@ivaldir.net>
 <cc1c38a4-108c-5f3f-7fa1-400fdcf497f6@freebsd.org>
 <ee6fe33b-aa24-ae5f-f652-f940e15c247a@jetcafe.org>
 <1498157001.2235.1.camel@gmail.com>
 <ffe23575-09a8-9e8c-ab21-772ca5e71aa1@jetcafe.org>
 <1498206372.2506.1.camel@gmail.com>
 <00d078be50a83b6e18ef20bfe76e30ca@acheronmedia.hr>
 <1498210501.2506.6.camel@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <aeaf1b9804c806947515efadcfd26cd5@acheronmedia.com>
X-Sender: vlad-fbsd@acheronmedia.com
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.5
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 09:47:50 -0000

On 2017-06-23 11:35, demelier.david@gmail.com wrote:
> 
> Release branches do not need backports.

I think we have different concepts of "backport" here. I'm not talking 
about backports as defined by debian backports repository. I'm talking 
about taking a piece of code from NEWER version and turning it into a 
patch for OLDER version.

Unless you mean that release branches would get no fixes, period? 
That's.... well, "svn checkout" and don't touch it ever again :)



That's the only way to deal with security/bug fixes for ports that mix 
new features (that may break things) with fixes, when they release a new 
version.

Either that, or you simply bump the version and get both the fixes AND 
new features.... but that's what's being done with QUARTERLY now, and 
we're back to square one.



-- 
Vlad K.