From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 17 05:26:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22AAD16A4DF for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 05:26:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from novel@smtp.hispeed.ch) Received: from smtp.hispeed.ch (mxout.hispeed.ch [62.2.95.247]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AEC43D4C for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 05:26:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from novel@smtp.hispeed.ch) Received: from coredump.fannet.ru (R1-Vl6-82-116-56-21.fannet.ru [82.116.56.21]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.hispeed.ch (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.6/taifun-1.0) with ESMTP id k7H5Q1Qp005247; Thu, 17 Aug 2006 07:26:01 +0200 Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:26:31 +0400 From: Roman Bogorodskiy To: "[LoN]Kamikaze" Message-ID: <20060817052631.GB62148@underworld.novel.ru> Mail-Followup-To: "[LoN]Kamikaze" , ports@freebsd.org References: <20060816123335.GA42090@underworld.novel.ru> <44E34BF8.2020104@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <44E34BF8.2020104@gmx.de> X-PGP: http://people.freebsd.org/~novel/novel.key.asc X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88.4, clamav-milter version 0.88.4 on smtp-03.tornado.cablecom.ch X-Virus-Status: Clean X-DCC-spamcheck-02.tornado.cablecom.ch-Metrics: smtp-03.tornado.cablecom.ch 1378; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports tree tagging again X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 05:26:04 -0000 --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: > And why is it that you always need to run the very latest version? Just > pick the last package that was available. It's normally new enough. Where have I said I need _lastest_ version of everything? You got it totally wrong. I do not need lastest version of packages, I just want packages were consistant and working, that's all. =20 > > 2. Port tree is unstable > >=20 > > IMO, port tree is not very stable. I mean: we're all human and more or > > less often make mistakes and inaccurate commits. So you cannot be sure > > that if you cvsup/portsnap your tree, it will not break something > > (e.g. because of some typo). It's OK to have such errors in general, and > > we can do nothing with it, but there are a lot of silly errors which > > could be avoided and you definitely don't deal with on a stable system. >=20 > There's always something that can go wrong, especially if you deal with > messy ports that require a compatibility layer. But native builds cause > problems very rarely. > =20 > > II Solutions > >=20 > > Yeah, I'm going to talk about ports tree tagging again :-). So what I > > propose: having HEAD and STABLE (or whatever you want't to call it,=20 > > so e.g. not to confuse with src/) branches. Committers commit all=20 > > patches to HEAD first. Then they wait for two things: > > - For next run on pointyhat to find out if package builds well > > (for a start, we could wait only for 6.x/i386 builds) > > - User feedback. Like, if there's no complains like "ahh, it > > broke everyhting, ahaha, please backout!", so everything's ok >=20 > What about security critical changes? Would you push them through that > process as well? Read the portupgrade man page and look for the '-b' > flag. Security changes could be backported faster (but they should be reviewed and tested better). > If you want a branched system, why not use PKGSRC? Because I want to use freebsd ports, not pkgsrc. I'm familiar with it and I work with it for several years. =20 > > ... > >=20 > > Comments are welcome! >=20 > It is normally not necessary to have the very latest version of everythin= g. > With your approach you wouldn't really receive binaries earlier. Only > people who are willing to build ports themselves receive the ports later. It looks like you see only what you want to see, but not that I actually wrote. I propose creating STABLE branch because I prefer to have more stable and better tested software than new, but not enough stable software. --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBROP+B4B0WzgdqspGAQK72wP8CM+jzoIxcNC6CPgUOKY88PBthFLNHlyA w/zFNjSBiV/kR3cj8Q++8lKXAb5zOc1yJ6/yVn6FkBuinEOjbE2CQ/wra9rqNx0b GcJf5AHuRd9nILMB2pSeFfCh+EymqVWEeZOQi/JgsN0H1MqvC8ev11fet57QF1Mn MyoeV48rJ04= =0Ts6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o--