Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:26:12 +0200 From: demelier.david@gmail.com To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Message-ID: <1498206372.2506.1.camel@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <ffe23575-09a8-9e8c-ab21-772ca5e71aa1@jetcafe.org> References: <CAO%2BPfDeFz1JeSwU3f21Waz3nT2LTSDAvD%2B8MSPRCzgM_0pKGnA@mail.gmail.com> <20170622121856.haikphjpvr6ofxn3@ivaldir.net> <dahnkctsm1elbaqlarl8b9euouaplqk2tv@4ax.com> <20170622141644.yadxdubynuhzygcy@ivaldir.net> <cc1c38a4-108c-5f3f-7fa1-400fdcf497f6@freebsd.org> <ee6fe33b-aa24-ae5f-f652-f940e15c247a@jetcafe.org> <1498157001.2235.1.camel@gmail.com> <ffe23575-09a8-9e8c-ab21-772ca5e71aa1@jetcafe.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 11:57 -0700, Dave Hayes wrote: > Would you agree that release branches would be unnecessary if > somehow > you could select the version of node that the ports tree builds via > some > (as yet unspecified) mechanism? I've also think about that but I'm not sure if it's easier than having frozen release branches. Release branches won't have many maintenance except individual bug fixes when security advisories are found. No backport, no updates. On the other hand, having to deal case-by-case for which ports should have version is very hard and complex. It's the case of some of them, node, postgresql, apache. But then we will have thousands of ports to add just to provides different versions. Cheers, -- David Demelier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1498206372.2506.1.camel>