On 2025-08-19 22:54, Gleb Popov wrote:
On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 1:49 AM Colin Percival <[email protected]> wrote:To reduce long-term confusion, I'm intending to rename the "FreeBSD" repository to "FreeBSD-ports", and similarly rename "FreeBSD-kmods" to "FreeBSD-ports-kmods".
This doesn't make sense to me. Why will there be FreeBSD-ports and FreeBSD-ports-kmods? Will there also be FreeBSD-ports-archivers, FreeBSD-ports-x11-wm? Changing FreeBSD-kmods to FreeBSD-ports-kmods just seems very unintuitive.
Having "ports" in the repository name does not make sense to me at all. Ports are recipes to produce packages, but there are more ways (I know at least one) to create a pkg package.It defines a "FreeBSD" pkg repository which is in fact specifically bits maintained *outside* of FreeBSD (and packaged via the ports tree).Can't agree with this either. FreeBSD Ports are maintained *inside* the project as well as package building and hosting infrastructure. It feels perfectly fine to have a single configuration file named after the *vendor*, which provides multiple repos maintained by that vendor.
+1 on this Gleb. -- Sent from hardware running on and written by FreeBSD.
0xE512722F.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
