cvs commit: ports/dns Makefile ports/dns/bind93 Makefiledistinfo pkg-descr pkg-message pkg-plist

[Doug Barton]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:

> Ok, could you just outline to me why
>  <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide/ports.html#Q12.2.1.>
> does not apply, why dns/bind93 is not related to dns/bind9 and why there is 
> no history to preserve, especially given that you mean to remove dns/bind9.

Thank you, that is a reasonable question, and deserves a reasonable 
answer. There are two main reasons why a repo copy isn't needed here. 
First, when the BIND 9 port was created originally they made the same 
mistake you are suggesting, namely reop copying the BIND 8 port. This 
brought in tons of pointless history that wasn't relevant. I want to 
remedy that problem by creating a new port that doesn't drag along 
unrelated history.

Second, there is quite frankly no significant history _of the BIND 9 
port_ to preserve. If you had bothered to check the CVS history instead 
of simply offering a knee-jerk reaction then you would have already 
known this. Alternatively, if you did check the history, and there is 
something there that you think needs to be preserved at all costs, 
please state your case so that we can discuss it.

There is also (I think) a valid question of what is a "related" version 
here. BIND 9 is a complete rewrite, with a completely different 
codebase, distribution scheme, etc. BIND 9.3.x is essentially another 
rewrite, although they do share a common file format for the 
distribution, etc. If the original bind9 port had been created new 
rather than repo copied then I could more easily be persuaded that the 
bind93 port should be repo copied. However, at this point in the process 
I see no reason to drag all of that useless history into a new port.

Doug

-- 

     This .signature sanitized for your protection