Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Sep 2024 10:47:20 +0200
From:      Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
To:        Olivier Certner <olce@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: It's not Rust, it's FreeBSD (and LLVM)
Message-ID:  <f4f638878a7ca50cc9fa356a804da70f@Leidinger.net>
In-Reply-To: <6292298.r39cKavRk3@ravel>
References:  <202409031532.483FW0If007252@critter.freebsd.dk> <2372745.viN5riZIyJ@ravel> <1fc46e4362bd11816d63027ec8cb8f09@Leidinger.net> <6292298.r39cKavRk3@ravel>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)

--=_fb1255fc750c2cc4b451a7a88b31938f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed

Am 2024-09-10 21:41, schrieb Olivier Certner:
>> IMO it doesn't hurt to move the toolchain out of src (...)
>> 
>> (...) I would not want to move everything to ports (...), but I would 
>> not
>> mind having a ports-like approach for src (...)
> 
> To clarify and be sure we are on the same page, I also don't mind what 
> you describe *provided* there is appropriate tooling to easily:
> - Get all the code part of base, and not only for building it.
> - Navigate its history, both for code changes but also integration in 
> base for upstream projects (upstream history is nice, but not enough).
> 
> In other words, I insist on having the same ease of use that we have 
> today with everything in a single repository.  Being able to just build 
> base *is not enough*.  Else, moving things to ports is going to cause 
> important pain for several use cases such as code inspection and 
> auditing, collaborative maintenance of code moved to ports, 
> understanding why/whether some changes have impact on some components, 
> system consistency, etc.

I consider src, ports, and docs as separate repos, not as one repo (we 
can branch them separately, that's the point of distinction for me). 
With that POV I do not think it is pragmatic to have the toolchain in 
the same repo. I understand that it's convenient and less painful, and 
pragmatic in regards to what you have mentioned, to keep it within a 
repo in our control (like now, just in parallel to ports/src/doc).

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF
http://www.FreeBSD.org    netchild@FreeBSD.org  : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF

--=_fb1255fc750c2cc4b451a7a88b31938f
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
 name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename=signature.asc;
 size=833
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=FC0a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_fb1255fc750c2cc4b451a7a88b31938f--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f4f638878a7ca50cc9fa356a804da70f>