Where is FreeBSD going?

[Roman Neuhauser]

# peterjeremy at optushome.com.au / 2004-01-08 18:33:40 +1100:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:08:38PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> >    Limitations of CVS don't exactly help either. The fact that you need
> >    direct access to the repository to be able to copy a tree with
> >    history (repocopy) as opposed to this operation being part of the
> >    interface[1], which means being lucky enough to find a committer,
> >    and get them commit the stuff within the blink of an eye ports is
> >    open, further constrains people's ability to work on FreeBSD with
> >    some satisfaction.
> 
> I'm not sure what is meant by this paragraph.  CVS doesn't support
> renaming files or directories - which can be a nuisance.  As used
> within the Project, "repocopy" means manually copying parts of the
> repository to simulate file/directory duplication or renaming.  This
> ability is restricted to a very small subset of committers - normal
> committers have to request repocopies as do non-committers.

    I somewhat lumped two things together there:
    * general port updates from lot of people going through a handful of
      committers, which on one hand helps QA by adding eye balls, but
      OTOH slows the process down.
    * repocopies go through a fraction of the abovementioned handful

    Now, I'm by no means advocating everybody should get ssh login on
    [dnp]cvs.freebsd.org; I just can't wait for the day when FreeBSD
    uses a SCM that handles tags and branches efficiently (so that
    people can freely create branches of areas they hack), that has
    permissions model with file- or directory-level granularity (so that
    people can be granted commit e. g. in /ports/x11-wm/openbox and
    nowhere else), etc.

-- 
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message.    see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html