svn commit: r216483 - head
Alexander at Leidinger.net
Fri Dec 17 16:10:20 UTC 2010
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:22:30 +0000 (UTC) "Bjoern A. Zeeb"
<bz at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
[descsription of the original ordering]
> I think grouping by date and then by file/lib/dir is actually better
> as it'll keep things logically together rather than possibly splitting
> it over 3 sections?
As the person who did the initial ordering: whatever makes sense. Way
back when I did it, the original ordering made some things more easy.
Now that the lists grown very big, everyone is welcome to change it to
something which makes sense today.
BTW: Should or should we not remove old entries which are way beyond
what we support, e.g. files from 2nd previous branches? The idea behind
is, that this prevents to have an abnormal big list of old stuff, and
that an update from e.g. 6 to 8 is not supported, so people need to go
from 6 to 7, can delete old stuff, update to 8 and delete again old
stuff. I am aware that people would have to rebuild all ports on 7 and
on 8 again, if they want to update libs. I am not sure if this matters.
If it matters, what about removing stuff which is from a 3rd previous
branch, e.g. if we delete on 8 it will remove outdated files from 7 and
6, but not from 5?
More information about the svn-src-all