Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 11:46:59 +0200 From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@freebsd.org> To: Dan Langille <dan@langille.org> Cc: freebsd-git@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multiple repos? Message-ID: <20200711094659.GC16439@acme.spoerlein.net> In-Reply-To: <6351781B-4B3C-427D-95CB-661E052D6081@langille.org> References: <6351781B-4B3C-427D-95CB-661E052D6081@langille.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2020-07-10 at 21:02:36 -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > At present, I'm using https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports for FreshPorts > > However, FreshPorts does the entire repo. > > I'm suddenly realizing I need multiple repos: > > * https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd > * https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-quarterly > * https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-doc > > Does this seem right? > > This seems to cover what is found at https://svnweb.freebsd.org > > * base > * ports > * doc Hi Dan, it depends on how exactly you are using these repos, but we won't have a mono-repo with src+doc+ports+QR combined, that seems a bit impractical. I wish doc was merged into src at some stage, but it also contains the website, so that would seem odd again. Why would freshports need the quarterly reports or the doc repo though? If you're looking for the quarterly ports branches instead, they are simply branches in git, e.g. https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/tree/branches/2014Q1 but the exact location is subject to change (the question is whether we want all folks to always pull all old branches by default, because that seems wasteful) Cheers Uli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200711094659.GC16439>