On 16.12.2016 11:38, Willem Jan Withagen wrote:
On 16-12-2016 11:10, Julian Elischer wrote:
On 16/12/2016 4:01 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, at 23:14, Grzegorz Junka wrote:
I heard that ports' SVN is mirrored to Github. Isn't it enough to just
create a branch or tag for each quarterly release? Even if quarterly
packages are deleted, re-building packages from such branch/tag should
allow to recreate those packages as required since the same code would
give the same packages?
These branches already exist BTW:
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports/tree/branches/2016Q3
the trouble is that the packages are deleted as soon as they are stable.
It is sort of amusing/depressing/hilarious of all the flavours and ways
everybody works with ports. And I've used them all, just hard core
building, postmaster, portsnap, pouderiere...
Each has its merit, but IMHO everything is not as bad as frozen in stone
CentOS packages.
Or Ubunut or or or...
One of the big advantages of the portstree is, that you actually get new
versions of the software and not just security-fixes.
I regularly stumble across actual bugs, which are there for years, just
because the are not fixed by purpose. This is really really frustrating.
Bringing new versions is a big plus for the ports-tree. And if you don't
need them you are free to stay with the old ones. And its easy enough to
build and change everything like you want. Ever really tried this for
various linux-distros? Its very painful.
Greetings,
Torsten
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
