[RFC] Why FreeBSD ports should have branches by OS version

[Julian Elischer]

On 23/6/17 2:57 am, Dave Hayes wrote:
> On 06/22/2017 11:43, demelier.david at gmail.com wrote:
>> Let me use my example of www/node back. I have built the port www/node
>> in poudriere using this origin (so no version). At the time I've built
>> it it was a 6.x version. When I upgraded my machine, www/node has
>> switched to 7.x version and since this software follows semantic
>> versioning, every application using the 6.x branch may or may not work
>> anymore.
>
> I completely agree that an annoying consequence of what the 
> volunteers are doing with the ports tree. These unwelcome surprises 
> are the bulk of my non-automated work in creating package repositories.
>
> Frankly, I also wish this kind of thing would stop. Ultimately my 
> wishes are irrelevant for reasons far far beyond the scope of this 
> thread.
>
>> Now, I'm in a state where if I pull the ports tree, I must check if
>> www/node6 still exists or I must not upgrade.
>>
>> With releases branches I will be sure that:
>>
>>   1. www/node will *always* be at a 6.x version;
>>   2. www/node will still be supported for the version of the FreeBSD
>> system.
>
> That sounds reasonable...yet others will likely expect www/node to 
> always be the latest version. Perhaps these others might complain 
> that it is not the latest version and it would be reasonable to have 
> node always be at the latest version.
then at install they should set their packages to follow head, and 
ignore the branches.
>
> Would you agree that release branches would be unnecessary if 
> somehow you could select the version of node that the ports tree 
> builds via some (as yet unspecified) mechanism?