Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:50:43 -0800 (PST) From: s.ende@gmx.net To: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: ports/25220: Release and Development Ports Message-ID: <200102200250.f1K2ohM36958@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 25220 >Category: ports >Synopsis: Release and Development Ports >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: medium >Responsible: freebsd-ports >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: wish >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Mon Feb 19 19:00:01 PST 2001 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Steve >Release: FreeBSD-4.2 Stable with current ports >Organization: >Environment: FreeBSD stormy.lan 4.2-STABLE FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE #0: Tue Jan 2 00:34:53 CET 2001 root@stormy.lan:/usr/src/sys/compile/STORMY i386 >Description: Currently FreeBSD is splitted into STABLE and CURRENT CVS versions. The ports tree is as far as i see from the docs which i read 5 minutes ago packaged and "freezed" for every release + keept up to date for checkout in a cvs-tree. Ok this far. Now if i want a newer release of a port, like when a new application gets released, i have to update the ports tree (i will not compile from source) and install it from there. The ports are submitted and maintained by FreeBSD-users and commiters and integrated into the ports tree by the port maintainers. My problem now is, that the port maintainer (e.g. the person that submited the port) decides, what version should be integrated into the tree. So it happens from time to time (like now with eterm, and before with xchat) that a previous stable release of a port gets updated to a development version. The eterm package was version 0.8.11 (a stable release) and now got updated to eterm 0.9.0 (a development release, which the author does not recoment for end-users) I think that is wrong, since development software is useless for me in a productive environment and i do not want to downgrade the ports manualy/check every port if it is the right version to install for me. Maybe i did not see the whole problem or did not read the docs carefully enough (I looked at the faq, the handbook and the ports handbook), but i whould like to hear your response. >How-To-Repeat: >Fix: Do not just let portlint do the dirty work. You should also check the port for content (if this is possible. it may be a too big overhead for the ports team, the last time i submitted a port it took 1,5 months and 2 emails to integrate. (do you need help? i would like to if you need)) I could think of two solutions: 1) split the ports tree into current and stable. i don't think thats usefull, but its a solution. 2) use port-stable/ and port-(dev/current)/ dirs instead of just port/ dirs this may be more usefull, but adds a lot more work. >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102200250.f1K2ohM36958>