svn commit: r525624 - in head/shells: . ksh2020

[Cy Schubert]

In message <202002090532.0195WjTr052655 at repo.freebsd.org>, Cy Schubert 
writes:
> Author: cy
> Date: Sun Feb  9 05:32:45 2020
> New Revision: 525624
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/525624
>
> Log:
>   att/ast on Github has branched ksh2020 and reverted mainline back to
>   ksh93u+ and v-. See github commit 0be82553e98be77238577bc0eaafda0f1cf807fe.
>   
>   To learn how and why our att/ast upstream made this decision see
>   https://github.com/att/ast/issues/1464 and
>   https://github.com/att/ast/issues/1466.
>   
>   The next steps will be to update shells/ksh93-devel to att/ast master.
>   shells/ksh93 will likely be based on att/ast master at
>   0be82553e98be77238577bc0eaafda0f1cf807fe or some future tag or branch.
>
> Added:
>   head/shells/ksh2020/
>      - copied from r525517, head/shells/ksh93-devel/
> Modified:
>   head/shells/Makefile
>   head/shells/ksh2020/Makefile
>   head/shells/ksh2020/distinfo

There appears to be growing support for the next generation of ksh.

https://github.com/att/ast/issues/1470

We already have ksh93 and ksh93-devel. Current thinking is to copy rename 
ksh93 to a new name in line with the new project, whatever they decide. 
ksh93-devel will be copied to a new ksh<something>-devel, tracking the new 
project while ksh93-devel itself  will revert back to the AT&T 2020/02/08 
rebase. That leaves att-ksh which IMO should be renamed back to ksh93.

The todo at the moment is to see what the community decides. But this is 
currently my thinking about this.


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy at FreeBSD.org>   Web:  http://www.FreeBSD.org

	The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.