From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 16 21:33:35 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A45F216A41F for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:33:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from misav07.sasknet.sk.ca (misav07.sasknet.sk.ca [142.165.20.171]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D44713C458 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:33:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from shurd@sasktel.net) Received: from bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca ([142.165.72.22]) by misav07 with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 15:33:34 -0600 Received: from server.hurd.local (adsl-76-202-204-41.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net [76.202.204.41]) by bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca (SaskTel eMessaging Service) with ESMTPA id <0JJQ00C0SZVXHW00@bgmpomr1.sasknet.sk.ca> for ports@FreeBSD.org; Sat, 16 Jun 2007 15:33:34 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:33:33 -0700 From: Stephen Hurd In-reply-to: <20070616202819.GA29331@rot13.obsecurity.org> To: Kris Kennaway Message-id: <4674572D.9060707@sasktel.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <4673B0DB.3040100@sasktel.net> <46742CF6.3050901@sasktel.net> <20070616202819.GA29331@rot13.obsecurity.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.2) Gecko/20070523 SeaMonkey/1.1.1 Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Sam Lawrance Subject: Re: Clarification on fetch/extract targets X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:33:35 -0000 Kris Kennaway wrote: >> Actually, I found it quite easy to have the port pull the sources from >> svn. Who are we concerned about making it easier for and why (and how >> is it any easier?) >> > > Everyone behind a firewall that only allows fetching via HTTP/FTP, for > one. Also everyone without live network access, and those with > pay-per-download who have a free local distfile mirror, etc. > > Tarballs are overwhelmingly preferred. > > Kris > Ok... I was looking at it from the standpoint of someone who wants the newest version and doesn't care of the pkg-plist is stale. They could just bump PORTREVISION and reinstall. So... how about this: - A distfile target which generates a distfile. The idea being that this would be the one on the local distfile mirror or what have you. - A WITH_SVN option (defaults to off) which allows the end user to specify he/she wants to use the subversion. In this case then, the end user would need to bump PORTREVISION and enable the WITH_SVN option.