Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:44:34 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Audacity needs a loving family Message-ID: <45E0A3B2.2030501@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <1172349196.1809.72.camel@localhost> References: <20070224023538.GC34523@nowhere> <20070224083652.L53742@thermonuclear.org> <1172349196.1809.72.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tom McLaughlin wrote: > On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 08:41 -0500, Peter Beckman wrote: >> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Craig Boston wrote: > <snip> >> I'm not interested in maintainership of Audacity, but your post did bring >> up a thought. >> >> I think it would make sense to have a wiki for maintainers where they can >> keep notes, documentation and special circumstances information about >> ports. Add links to the definitive source of the code, a short history, >> a link to the CVS/SVN repository changelog, and as Craig mentioned above a >> listing of "a few issues ... that need to be kept in mind." This way even >> if Craig got hit by a beer truck (God forbid), the knowledge Craig gained >> during his maintainership would live on. One section per port, and ports >> could link to eachother (dependencies). >> > > Most of this information can be obtained already from cvs logs if people > take the time to write informative PR descriptions (and we take the time > to make informative commit messages). I typically cut and paste the > relevant lines from an app's included ChangeLog into commit messages as > well as my own notes now. I can then use freshports or `cvs log` to > look at my port's history as can anyone else and get a pretty good idea > of what's gone on over time. I think many other ports committers simply > cut and paste PR descriptions as commit messages too. There are some > things that are harder to keep track of through cvs logs like known > issues but I don't see anything wrong with maintainers adding a "known > issues" section to a port's pkg-descr. They can even add an "RCS:" line > to it with a link to the site's code repo if they want. > > There are some other alternatives of course. In the OpenBSD ports tree > maintainers often write their own README or README.OpenBSD for their > ports. These files are typically open ended and include whatever info > the maintainer deems relevant. Gentoo uses a ChangeLog file in portage > for each app. This is in part because each program version has its own > ebuild file so change history is not preserved across program versions > by the ebuild file. Maybe people might find the addition of an optional > README.FreeBSD or ChangeLog file useful as a coherent record of the port > and maintainer's work? > > tom > > <snip> Either that or a common resource where the maintainer could submit changelogs and then users can look up the info... maybe a changelog feature on the FreeBSD ports site? -Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45E0A3B2.2030501>