Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 21:01:20 -0800 (PST) From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami) To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com Cc: rodolfo@ravel.ufrj.br, hubs@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-maintainers@wcarchive.cdrom.com, dg@root.com Subject: Re: Proposed reorganization of ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD Message-ID: <199812230501.VAA11527@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <81498.914350109@zippy.cdrom.com> (jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* > In this new structure where would fit what used to be packages-2.2.7,
* > packages-2.2.8 and packages-3.0 ?
*
* They would live under the release dirs or, in the case of a "branch"
* set, under the branch subdirs. I'll paste in a current outline of the
* proposed changes below, just in case this is confusing.
You mean packages-2.2.7 would move to under 2.2.7-RELEASE? I don't
mind moving old ones that way, but the reasons why all the new ones
are outside with symlinks pointing that way is because the
packages-X.Y.Z arrive earlier than X.Y.Z-RELEASE (for testing) and we
didn't want to move them when the release is out to avoid causing
unnecessary re-fetching by the mirrors. So we might as well take this
into account and keep them separate from now on.
* Anyway, here's the latest revision of my proposed reorg:
*
* README.TXT
* index.html
* releases/
* README.TXT
* index.html
* 2.2.7-RELEASE/
* <stays the same>
* 2.2.8-RELEASE/
* <stays the same>
* 3.0-RELEASE/
* <stays the same>
* 3.0.1-RELEASE/
* README.TXT
* index.html
* axp/
* x86/
* 2.2.8-STABLE -> ../2.2-branch
* 3.0-CURRENT -> ../3.0-branch
I don't like the last two very much. We have a well-defined meaning
for the word "release" and that's the official releases. Or is it
necessary to somehow have all the "uname -r" name show up under the
same directory for the install floppies to work?
* 3.0-branch/
* README.TXT
* index.html
* ports
* packages
* src
* commerce
* xperimnt
* 2.2-branch/
* README.TXT
* index.html
* ports
* packages
* src
* commerce
* xperimnt
* doc/
* ...
*
* distfiles/
* .. distfiles ..
Instead of this, how about we create one more toplevel "ports" where
all the ports/packages/distfiles stuff will go. Links will be made
from other places if necessary (including the toplevel "distfiles").
Something like:
ports/
index.html
distfiles/
distfiles-3.0.1/ (distfiles for 3.0.1 ports)
packages-2.2.7/
packages-2.2.8/
packages-3.0/
packages-3.0.1/
packages-current/
packages-stable/
ports/ ("cvs co ports")
ports-2.2.7/ (extracted version of 2.2.7/ports)
ports-2.2.8/ (etc.)
ports-3.0/
ports-3.0.1/
ports-current -> ports
ports-stable -> ports
There are many mirrors who don't have enough space for packages and/or
distfiles, it will be easier for them to decide which ones to delete
if they are all in one place. Especially if we finally go to the
"distfiles per release" organization.
Satoshi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hubs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199812230501.VAA11527>