Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:42:48 -0800
From:      Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>
To:        Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/ports-mgmt Makefile ports/ports-mgmt/pkg_cleanup Makefile pkg-descr ports/ports-mgmt/pkg_cleanup/files Makefile pkg_cleanup.1 pkg_cleanup.c
Message-ID:  <477EB668.3090400@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200801041328.m04DSp6h096405@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200801041328.m04DSp6h096405@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pav Lucistnik wrote:
>   Modified files:
>     ports-mgmt           Makefile 
>   Added files:
>     ports-mgmt/pkg_cleanup Makefile pkg-descr 
>     ports-mgmt/pkg_cleanup/files Makefile pkg_cleanup.1 
>                                  pkg_cleanup.c 

Is there a standard policy for when a port's source code should be included in
the ports tree instead of in a separate distfile which is fetched on demand?

Colin Percival



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?477EB668.3090400>