cfengine vs. cfengine2

Gordon Tetlow gordon at
Fri Mar 11 10:34:33 PST 2005

Sergei Kolobov wrote:

>(sysutils/cfengine and sysutils/cfengine2 port maintainers cc'd)
>I would like to get your feedback on idea of deprecating cfengine port
>in favour of newer cfengine2 port.
>After all, the former is at version 1.6.3, and the latest function change
>was this:
>revision 1.24
>date: 2002/07/29 20:47:37;  author: gordon;  state: Exp;  lines: +1 -1
>Update cfengine MASTER_SITES
>Note this was almost 3 years ago.
>I think we could first add NO_LATEST_LINK to the cfengine port
>so users can pkg_add -r cfengine to get the latest version
>and then mark the port as DEPRECATED with some date - say 3 or 6 months
>in the future.
I'm happy with the NO_LATEST_LINK idea. I would prefer a nice long
DEPRECATED period (6 months at least). If you would like to make these
changes, please go ahead, I don't actually have a ports commit bit.

>Any thoughts, objections?
>Is cfengine 1.x still in use somewhere?
The thing with cfengine is once it's setup, you leave it running
forever. I believe that changing from 1.x to 2.x was very difficult
which is why the old version is still around.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 254 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url :

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list