Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 12 Jul 2020 16:14:43 +0200
From:      =?UTF-8?Q?Ulrich_Sp=C3=B6rlein?= <uqs@freebsd.org>
To:        Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        Rene Ladan <rene@freebsd.org>, git@freebsd.org, mat@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ports 2020Q3 branch not present?
Message-ID:  <CAJ9axoRRNm9y5Ws-2dWmr=%2BGiH3ZM0tV=mxe0Sj%2B9Sw8dBr9zA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfr843KeRyYNgiLDDskEanS=8%2Bj6cUWPXY6gJP_Rx_zk5g@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20200710212416.GA89164@freefall.freebsd.org> <20200711093659.GA16439@acme.spoerlein.net> <20200711205804.GA22050@freefall.freebsd.org> <CANCZdfr843KeRyYNgiLDDskEanS=8%2Bj6cUWPXY6gJP_Rx_zk5g@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 6:35 AM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 2:58 PM Rene Ladan <rene@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, so currently the quarterly (and older releng) branches are directly
>> under
>> the "remotes" origin, just like master itself. This makes switching
>> between
>> branches easy, which comes in handy for MFHs I think.
>>
>
> They are just like the stable branches in the src tree (or somewhat
> similar), so I think they should be the same, and pulled by default. While
> they are quarterly, the traffic on them is smaller than a typical stable
> branch in src, so it's not a huge amount of extra revisions.
>
> The only way to find the size is to pull with and without them and observe
> the difference.
>
>
portmgr should weigh in on where these branches should end up. Currently
I'm dumping them in refs/heads/20xxQy (not pushed yet, needs a fix),
because having them called refs/heads/branches/2020Q1 is a bit weird as the
"branches" is rather redundant.

Cheers
Uli



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ9axoRRNm9y5Ws-2dWmr=%2BGiH3ZM0tV=mxe0Sj%2B9Sw8dBr9zA>