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

Baho Utot baho-utot at columbus.rr.com
Fri Jun 23 14:56:12 UTC 2017

On 06/23/17 10:30, Guido Falsi wrote:
> On 06/23/17 15:11, Baho Utot wrote:
>> On 06/23/17 04:53, Guido Falsi wrote:
>>> On 06/23/17 10:26, demelier.david at gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 11:57 -0700, Dave Hayes wrote:
>>>>> 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?
>>>> I've also think about that but I'm not sure if it's easier than having
>>>> frozen release branches.
>>> I usually stay away from this kind of threads, but I'd like to point
>>> out a very simple concept that has not been expressed.
>>> The ports tree repository is fully open source, available via
>>> subversion from the FreeBSD project and also mirrored on github. There
>>> is absolutely nothing stopping you(and anyone with time, skill and
>>> willingness to help you) from starting your fork from whichever source
>>> and using whatever tool you prefer, creating the branches you're
>>> describing.
>>> If your model works fine I'm quite sure the FreeBSD community and
>>> project will be quite happy to embrace it.
>>> As stated, the FreeBSD project (core, portmgr and committers) perceive
>>> a manpower problem in relation to implementing what you describe. In
>>> this thread it has been stated that such a manpower problem does not
>>> really exist. I cannot think of a better way to show there actually is
>>> no manpower problem than creating a working example of such a workflow
>>> maintained by just a few people with little effort, as you said
>>> repeatedly.
>>> On other hand demanding and/or insisting that others implement your
>>> idea when they clearly disagree with you is not very constructive.
>>> In relation to the suggestion of a stable or release ports branch:
>>> I'd also like a ports branch where things are merged only when really
>>> needed, some kind of "stable" branch. I don't like the release way you
>>> describe, but maybe it could actually work as an option, but I too see
>>> the manpower problem. An actual working proof of concept like I
>>> described above is the only thing that would persuade me I'm wrong
>>> about that.
>>> (I could try to help with such an experiment but I don't know how much
>>> time I could really spare for it)
>> Ok, since you are taking the lead on this......
> Since when "help with" is a synonym of "lead this effort"?
>> When do we start?
>>> Where shall I post my repository to?
>> And updates?
>> Should the start be for the 12.0 branch or should earlier?
>> I can start on packaging the base system some time August is that ok
>> with you and will it fit your schedule?
> I'm curious to know which paragraph is the sarcasm especially directed
> at, if the first or the last, in parenthesis and meant at giving hand if
> someone else has a clear plan. I can't see me leading an effort I
> clearly stated I don't think has many chances. Maybe I was not perfectly
> clear.

I have faith in you... you can do this...when do we start?

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list