Re: got(1) in base consideration

Kyle Evans wrote:
> On 5/5/25 03:58, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> What is the intended audience of the setup?
>> Who would not install normal git port but still want /usr/src populated?
>> For what purpose?
> I'm thinking less about src here and more about ports, where end-user/ 
> sysadmin may just want a simple mechanism to keep their ports tree 
> updated (as a replacement for, e.g., portsnap).
> 
I've seen some user complaints about having to install a port, ie 
something not part of base, just to clone and update our own trees. To 
me (and other folks who were used to using git(1) to begin with) this is 
a minor detail, but I can see how some others feel not having a git 
client in base violates their understanding about base being a "complete 
system".

-- 
Charlie Li
...nope, still don't have an exit line.