pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Moving pkgsrc-wip away from SourceForge

Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost> writes:

>     Date:        Sat, 04 Jul 2015 12:21:21 -0400
>     From:        Greg Troxel <>
>     Message-ID:  <>
>   | Benny Siegert <> writes:
>   | > a) moving away from sourceforge is a good occasion for moving away from CVS,
>   | 
>   | agreed
> I disagree - unless the plan is also to move pkgsrc away from cvs (at the
> same time.)

I think pkgsrc itself is a discussion for another day.

> The two ought to be using the same technology throughout, or part of the
> rationale for wip to exist is lost.

Perhaps part of the rationale changes to explore how pkgsrc in git/hg
would be, instead of matching.

> I know that I unpack wip (when I use it) into .../pkgsrc/wip and then
> use
> 	cd .../pkgsrc; cvs up
> to update both pkgsrc and pkgsrc/wip in one operation.   That makes wip behave
> and act, just like pkgsrc, and I can (once it is set up) simply forget that
> it is a little different.

I used to be able to do that.   Now 'cvs up' in pkgsrc does pkgsrc, and
then I just cd into wip and cvs up for that.  So changing to git up
instead is easy.   (Yes, I know git up isn't a command, and have:

	up = !git remote update -p && git merge --ff-only @{u}

> While wip serves to develop packages, for which the version control tool is
> irrelevant, it also serves to teach people how to operate on pkgsrc, which
> requires that the two use the same mechanisms.

Not really, because using source control is a basic skill that transfers
across many projects, and what's hard about pkgsrc is pkgsrc-specific.
If you look at what's been trouble or contentious, it hasn't been about
tool usage.

Attachment: pgpJb3pNxUQhN.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index