Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 4 Aug 2018 15:09:57 +0200
From:      Rainer Duffner <rainer@ultra-secure.de>
To:        Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Jules Gilbert via freebsd-pkg <freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Archives of last quarterly package builds?
Message-ID:  <201539A4-078E-4884-8FEB-CB512F9E4DBD@ultra-secure.de>
In-Reply-To: <20180804063919.GI2118@home.opsec.eu>
References:  <CAD2Ti28J1UTKkLETgj0vJerHBX3SKOgpAOp6UkrhOR76TGpT%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> <34cb48da-1f15-1610-966d-1e30314f7665@freebsd.org> <CAD2Ti2--zdv4e_QvSfHL1prDAnGZyTvNYMzzgA_V%2B3LN6_RTEQ@mail.gmail.com> <20180803031744.GH2118@home.opsec.eu> <a6dda209-dc35-99ba-a87d-8035c2932df0@freebsd.org> <20180804063919.GI2118@home.opsec.eu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


> Am 04.08.2018 um 08:39 schrieb Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org>:
>=20
> The idea is: use the quarterlies, and if the next quarter comes,
> upgrade to that quarterly. The quarterlies are a way to test
> if we can provide some 'more stable tree' than HEAD for the ports.
>=20
> It's not perfect, and we all learn the use cases and the issues etc.
>=20
> I don't have the overview over all the posts on that issues, so:
> is there a text that describes alternative approaches ? Something
> where implementation can be discussed ?



The problem is that different people have different foci.

I think it=E2=80=99s assumed that one hosts and maintains his (or her) =
own copy of the ports-tree and maintains it according to one=E2=80=99s =
own focus-points.

E.g.: if I was to maintain my own fork of the ports-tree, I=E2=80=99d =
lay the emphasis on a number of ports that greatly concern me (apache, =
php, nginx, varnish, python and some of its base-ports, plugins for =
nagios and some other stuff I=E2=80=99ve forgotten). I=E2=80=99d =
basically follow upstream with those very closely.
The rest, I=E2=80=99d let dormant most of the time, unless a =
security-vulnerability made an update inevitable.

But I=E2=80=99m really not in a position to do that, so I use the =
quarterly cuts. They are a good compromise.

Sometimes, I copy over a port from HEAD to my quarterly checkout because =
I really want to have the update in. But that has become rare, actually.


Different people have different requirements.=20
I think if you need very high stability, you=E2=80=99ll likely end up =
using something else (CentOS+ Software Collections - or Ubuntu, if =
you=E2=80=99re really desperate...)

Certainly, someone from the foundation or some other company has done =
the math on what it would take (man-power and financials) to maintain =
certain subsets of the ports for longer than three months.
Or everything.

It will, however, be almost impossible to get it right for everybody.








Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201539A4-078E-4884-8FEB-CB512F9E4DBD>