From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 2 21:42:22 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5872C106564A; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 21:42:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 65-241-43-5.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02F014D9E8; Thu, 2 Jun 2011 21:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4DE803B9.5090903@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 14:42:17 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110429 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dokuchaev References: <201106020616.p526GP0U053787@repoman.freebsd.org> <20110602104141.GA50574@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20110602104141.GA50574@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/mariadb-client Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-message pkg-plist ports/databases/mariadb-client/files mysql-server.in patch-extra::yassl::src::yassl_error.cpp patch-sql::mysqld.cc ports/databases/mariadb-scripts Makefile ... X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 21:42:22 -0000 On 06/02/2011 03:41, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > * Doug Barton wrote: >> These aren't ready for use yet, just checking in my WIP > > I think this is not the best way to deal with long porting efforts. > Sure it's very tempting to use version control for anything more > complicated that "hello world" type of work, but it this case local hg > or git mirror would suit much better. > > Last by not least, end users probably won't expect WIP in the ports: if > something's committed, it should work, if it does not, it is broken, not > "in progress". I believe our CVS should not be abused for private works > (private here means "behind the scenes"). First, the ports were marked IGNORE when I did the forced commit to acknowledge the repo-copy, so I don't think I am violating any user expectations here. Second, under normal circumstances I would agree with you, however the effort to split these ports has been more than I (foolishly? optimistically?) anticipated, so my usual method of committing the new version in one fell swoop wasn't going to be as easy as I had hoped. By clearing away the debris it makes it a lot easier for me to actually finish the work. All in all I think it's a net win, but I allow that reasonable minds can differ on this topic. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/