Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 15:11:38 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> Cc: peter@spinner.dialix.com.au, max@wide.ad.jp, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/apache Makefile ports/www/apache/filesMakefile Makefile.SSL md5 md5.SSL ports/www/apache/patchespatch-aa patch-ab patch-ac patch-ad patch-ae patch-af patch-agpatch-ah ports/www/apache/patches.SSL patch-aa patch-ab patch-ac ... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970727150715.8613A-100000@lsd.relcom.eu.net> In-Reply-To: <199707271102.EAA00850@blimp.mimi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 27 Jul 1997, Satoshi Asami wrote: > * I don't think that history needed. If you disagree, ask peter to restore > * Attic files to apache-stable + few changes after splitting. > > It's amazing you still haven't gotten the clue after all these years, > Andrey. :) I think history is essential for source code tracking, but not for ports patches, they change their place too often and commited over completely different patches. > Peter, what should we do? For apache-stable, I think we just need to > resurrect apache and update (downdate?) it to the latest stable > version. > As far apache-current...I don't know. Is it safe to repository copy > apache right over it? It should be, if the versions of all files are > newer, right? I have nothing against history resurrection, if you insist on purity here. History can be resurrected for both apache-stable and apache-current, first step will be restoring from the Attic and next will be merging with latest variant. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@null.net> http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.970727150715.8613A-100000>