Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:22:42 -0400 From: Jason Hellenthal <jhellenthal@dataix.net> To: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Jason Helfman <jhelfman@e-e.com>, Thomas Abthorpe <tabthorpe@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Ports tree migration to Subversion Message-ID: <20120629002242.GA2615@DataIX.net> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1uPXEhG-fY1%2BT8EJaaoe%2BQLLUyB3KvnXRH3=8r5eURyMg@mail.gmail.com> References: <20120627173011.GA50088@freefall.freebsd.org> <CAN6yY1s4e-6W9EvWn7EpC7OHmk71CY5EqjPigdJ8G-6qM9ZkMw@mail.gmail.com> <20120627215215.GS47920@dormouse.experts-exchange.com> <CAN6yY1uPXEhG-fY1%2BT8EJaaoe%2BQLLUyB3KvnXRH3=8r5eURyMg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:11:30PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Jason Helfman <jhelfman@e-e.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 02:47:34PM -0700, Kevin Oberman thus spake: > > > >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Thomas Abthorpe <tabthorpe@freebsd.org> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> The FreeBSD ports tree will migrate from CVS to Subversion soon. The > >>> anticipated date for the migration is July 14th. This will have no impact > >>> for ports tree users as there will be a SVN to CVS exporter. > >>> > >>> Please note that cvsup will still work after the migration. Nevertheless > >>> c(v)sup is pretty dated so you may want to see if portsnap(8) will fit > >>> your > >>> needs. > >>> > >>> Beat and Thomas > >>> on behalf of portmgr@ > >>> > >>> > >>> http://blogs.freebsdish.org/portmgr/2012/06/27/ports-tree-migration-to-subversion/ > >> > >> > >> While portsnap has several advantages over csup, it is unusable in my > >> case because I have always maintained local mods to ports in the ports > >> tree and portsnap neatly removes them. I may move to using svn to > >> maintain my own copy of the tree and update the working directory > >> where I can keep my customizations. > > > > > > You may want to look at the manpage for portsnap.conf and see how > > advantageous it may be to use the REFUSE option. > > That an excellent idea. I was thinking that, since I keep my private > patches in the files directory and let the normal 'make patch' apply > them, that it would still delete them, but careful reading of the man > page implies that I could list these file (paths) as REFUSED and > portsnap would leave them alone. > > I'll experiment and see of this works. If so, I can move away from csup. > In any event it may be more resourcful just to go to SVN as the advantages of that cannot be taken if something like portsnap or csup is used. Updating Diffing Committing Stating Reverting I am sure the list of 'ing goes on and on. -- - (2^(N-1))
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120629002242.GA2615>