Fine. Considering that maintainers already apply patches to the latest
quarterly branch. If there were to be OS version branches, it would
mean that maintainers apart from what they are doing now would
additionally need to apply selected patches to those OS version
branches?
"OS version branches" would be a complete waste of time and resources, and it
would remove some level of separation/independence between the base and ports.
The crux of the problem here is so called "stable ports", not necessarily
tying them to the life cycle of a base release. It doesn't make sense to tie
version of a port to the base release. Especially with the new releng support
schedule that would mean 5 years per major version which is quite a lot.
(snip)
I personally can't see the rationale of many OS version branches of ports: far
too much work.
I had the thought of something like that for (NetBSD) pkgsrc: a very tall
order, considering that pkgsrc has been ported to many OSes besides NetBSD.
Imagine a separate branch of pkgsrc for every version and branch of NetBSD,
FreeBSD, Linux, etc.
I only follow the current branch of FreeBSD ports and pkgsrc, though now I have
also become interested in pkgsrc-synth.
Tom
Are there any advantages of using pkg instead of pkgsrc on FreeBSD?
Instead of having branches by OS version, would having ports LTS
branches independent of the base system be a better solution?
Grzegorz
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
