Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 01 Jul 2002 12:07:20 -0700
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
To:        Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.ORG>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: RFC: Fate of /usr/share/doc/smm/10.named
Message-ID:  <3D20A868.9FCAE4B8@mindspring.com>
References:  <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020701134600.57152D-100000@fledge.watson.org> <3D209F09.1525FC90@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton wrote:
> I agree with this reasoning, and also with keeping them around
> "somewhere." The BOG is a particularly good candidate for pruning since
> it's still available from the vendor.

Things that are brought in on vendor branches should be identical
to the contents of packages distributed by the vendors themselves.

Any time you move away from what the vendor supplied, you increase
the number of extra delatas you have to think about the next time
there is a vendor release, and you go to import it.

Eventually, we may be able to bring a source tree in on a vendor
branch, if CVSup ever gets rewritten in C so that someone can hack
it into the code.  When that happens, CVS managed projects explicit
importation should become totally unnecessary.  But any deltas that
are maintained locally will end up being necessary to roll forward,
and attic deletions are ugly that way.

-- Terry

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D20A868.9FCAE4B8>