From owner-ctm-users@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jul 17 00:18:43 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ctm-users@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FF5C1065674 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:18:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Peter.Jeremy@alcatel-lucent.com) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A961E8FC0C for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:18:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.11]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id q6H05Dki007885 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:05:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: from insmb.au.alcatel-lucent.com (insmb.au.alcatel-lucent.com [139.188.42.184]) by usnavsmail3.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id q6H0595e020257 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 16 Jul 2012 19:05:12 -0500 Received: from pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com (pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com [139.188.13.50]) by insmb.au.alcatel-lucent.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id q6H05931025004; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:05:10 +1000 (EST) X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000001 Received: from pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6H058xo045670; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:05:08 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Peter.Jeremy@alcatel-lucent.com) Received: (from pjeremy@localhost) by pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q6H056QB045669; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:05:06 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from Peter.Jeremy@alcatel-lucent.com) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:05:06 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy To: Stephen Montgomery-Smith Message-ID: <20120717000506.GA45623@pjdesk.au.alcatel-lucent.com> References: <5003701B.7070706@missouri.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5003701B.7070706@missouri.edu> X-PGP-Key: http://www.rulingia.com/keys/peter.pgp User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.11 Cc: "ctm-users@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: SVN for ports X-BeenThere: ctm-users@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CTM User discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:18:43 -0000 --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2012-Jul-16 11:36:27 +1000, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: >1. Does anyone anticipate wanting a ctm-svn-ports, or will ctm-ports be= =20 >enough? Speaking for myself, no but you might want to see how popular ctm-svn is - I'm not sure if any "official" SVN mirrors exist so CTM may make a useful tool for replicating the SVN repos (though it's not really publicised). >2. At some point, I would like to stop creating deltas for ctm-cvs.=20 >These deltas take a long time (an hour or two) for my computer to=20 >create. (It takes about a minute to create ctm-svn deltas.) Will this=20 >upset people? It won't upset me. I suggest you monitor the mailing list and FTP downloads (talk to the various mirror admins) and see how popular they still are. The only reason I can see for sticking with CVS would be disk space. The SVN repository is about 4x the size of the CVS repository. --=20 Peter Jeremy --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAlAErDIACgkQ/opHv/APuIfSGgCglNv9Zi1yEOK8GDzI6xovZD91 4vAAniIlHyBSa6gGl4qjTJjWS/NwYArD =2Lhp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uAKRQypu60I7Lcqm--