svn - but smaller?
jcm at visi.com
Tue Mar 12 23:32:35 UTC 2013
On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 02:20:37 +0100
"Michael Ross" <gmx at ross.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 00:15:35 +0100, John Mehr
><jcm at visi.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:16:53 -0400
>> Patrick McEvoy <patmcevoy at mac.com> wrote:
>>> Hello John,
>>> This is Patrick the BSDTV guy. If you have the time /
>>>inclination, would you like to do a quick walk through
>>>svnup?**If you have a machine that will run Skype, I
>>>could record you doing a walk through including all the
>>>things you want to tell users about your port. Skype
>>>offers a "share your screen" feature that I have found
>>>helpful for making such videos. If you are interested,
>>>please let me know.
>>> Thank you for your support of the BSD community.
>>> -- Patrick McEvoy
>>> patmcevoy at mac.com
>>> cell: 718 440-5104
>>> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
>>>"freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>> I'm currently in the process of adding http/https
>>support to svnup and once I've got that working, the
>>command line interface will be changing to be more like
>>the traditional svn client to make it easier for people
>>to adopt the tool [...]
> What'd you think about a syntax extension along the
> svnup --bsd-base
> svnup --bsd-ports
> svnup --bsd-all
> with automagic host selection, default to uname's major
>version stable branch and default target dirs?
This sounds good to me, and as long as there's some sort
of a consensus that we're not breaking the principle of
least surprise, I'm all for it. The one default that may
be unexpected is the defaulting to the stable branch --
people who track the security branches will be left out.
So maybe something like:
svnup --security (or --release)
More information about the freebsd-stable