Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 09:11:49 -0400 From: Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version Message-ID: <ab6273b5-5373-fcef-b6b5-3c000330bd93@columbus.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <666bfe8c-f27d-2c11-2a4a-07da43bb7931@FreeBSD.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> <1498206372.2506.1.camel@gmail.com> <666bfe8c-f27d-2c11-2a4a-07da43bb7931@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06/23/17 04:53, Guido Falsi wrote: > On 06/23/17 10:26, demelier.david@gmail.com wrote: >> 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. > > I usually stay away from this kind of threads, but I'd like to point out > a very simple concept that has not been expressed. > > The ports tree repository is fully open source, available via subversion > from the FreeBSD project and also mirrored on github. There is > absolutely nothing stopping you(and anyone with time, skill and > willingness to help you) from starting your fork from whichever source > and using whatever tool you prefer, creating the branches you're > describing. > > If your model works fine I'm quite sure the FreeBSD community and > project will be quite happy to embrace it. > > As stated, the FreeBSD project (core, portmgr and committers) perceive a > manpower problem in relation to implementing what you describe. In this > thread it has been stated that such a manpower problem does not really > exist. I cannot think of a better way to show there actually is no > manpower problem than creating a working example of such a workflow > maintained by just a few people with little effort, as you said repeatedly. > > On other hand demanding and/or insisting that others implement your idea > when they clearly disagree with you is not very constructive. > > In relation to the suggestion of a stable or release ports branch: > > I'd also like a ports branch where things are merged only when really > needed, some kind of "stable" branch. I don't like the release way you > describe, but maybe it could actually work as an option, but I too see > the manpower problem. An actual working proof of concept like I > described above is the only thing that would persuade me I'm wrong about > that. > > (I could try to help with such an experiment but I don't know how much > time I could really spare for it) > Ok, since you are taking the lead on this...... When do we start? Where shall I post my repository to? And updates? Should the start be for the 12.0 branch or should earlier? I can start on packaging the base system some time August is that ok with you and will it fit your schedule?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ab6273b5-5373-fcef-b6b5-3c000330bd93>