Subject: Subversion (was: Re: package categories)
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Raphael Langerhorst <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/02/2006 15:47:08
Am Donnerstag, 2. November 2006 14:58 schrieb Geert Hendrickx:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 05:27:40PM -0600, Hugo Rivera wrote:
> > I think it would be a nice idea to add the "science" category in pkgsrc,
> > since there are some packages in the "math" category that really are
> > scientific packages, plus all the packages in "biology" should be moved
> > to this new "science" category.
> Don't take the pkgsrc category structure to serious; it's mostly a way to
> keep the number of entries in one directory somewhat limited. Moving a
> package between categories makes its history much harder to track, which =
> a good reason not to do that. Granted, that's purely a shortcoming of CV=
> but we have to live with it. That's why we have the pkgtools/pkgfind
> package. ;-)
since CVS is mentioned I would like to ask a question that might upset you =
would be surprised if it has not been already considered):
moving to svn.
Netbsd and pkgsrc are the only projects I work with that are (still) using =
and I consider it a considerable drawback (see example above, among others).
Also, when I do a cvs co for the first time (either src or pkgsrc) I get=20
interrupted around 3 to 10 times before I get a full checkout. It's not fun=
to work with this in the long-run although there might be reasons (existing=
infrastructure) that simply make it (almost) impossible to move somewhere=20
Now... are there plans to move pkgsrc from CVS to SVN?
> Btw, binary packages are structured according to a different scheme:
> CATEGORIES, which is much more easily changed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----