Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 15:55:22 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann <oppermann@pipeline.ch> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG, jmb@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/3.0-19980923-BETA/ Message-ID: <360A4F4A.E14273CF@pipeline.ch> References: <199809241346.VAA20850@spinner.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote: > > Andre Oppermann wrote: > > Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > -snip- > > > There's a swift current right now (groan), so if you don't subscribe > > > to cvs-all, now might be an excellent time to do so, at least during > > > the extent of the BETA period. :) > > > > That would kill me :( > > > > I'd like to see at least the base FreeBSD and Ports cvs lists separated. > > > > I fall on my knees and pray to you: please, please do this list. > > Hmm.. This isn't out of the question.. It looks like the split (by > subtree) mailing lists got killed while I was away. Yep. > Is there a need for (say): > > cvs-all (all commits) > cvs-30 (all commits related to 3.0 (aka -current, -beta, -stable etc) > cvs-22 (all commits related to 2.2.x (aka 2.2-stable etc) > cvs-ports (ports commits) > cvs-www (www tree) > > ie: > - a commit to src/* in -current would go to cvs-all and cvs-30. > - a commit to docs/* would go to cvs-all, cvs-22, cvs-30 (since it's used in > both branches - the docs area is not branched) > - a commit to ports/* would go to cvs-all and cvs-ports. > > Would this be useful? Too much? Too little? THis is different to what > we had before where commits to all branches were lumped in together. That looks really good and makes sense! jmb, please do it in this way. TIA! -- Andre To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?360A4F4A.E14273CF>