Move ctm to ports?
rik at inse.ru
Mon Dec 5 05:53:35 UTC 2011
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote:
> How would people feel about removing ctm and mkctm from the base
> system, and making it into a port?
Please check the discussion about CVS on current at . The problem with
ports that they are detached from the
base and they are not always out of the box.
> One advantage is that changes to ctm (like allowing different
> compression programs, or incorporating svn into ctm) can be made
> relatively quickly.
If the ports the only way for development of ctm, I suggest to try to
make it modular and keep the base functionality
out of the box as it is. The rest could be addon-ports. CTM from my
point of view is the bootstrapping tool and it
should not be removed from the base.
> For example, the following PR has not been acted upon:
> Also, if I want svn incorporated into ctm, then it will need the
> subversion port as a dependency.
> What would the disadvantages be?
> ctm-users at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "ctm-users-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the ctm-users