Re: Use of newest version number such as 10.0 instead of current

On 11/11/2011 20:33, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk_at_mit.edu> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>>
>>  Dear all ,
>>>
>>> Instead of using Current and then renaming everything  for a new version
>>> number ,
>>> is it not possible to use the newest version number in place of Current
>>> when it is branched .
>>>
>>> Such a change will prevent unnecessary renaming problems .
>>>
>>>
>>> For everyone , it i very easy to understand that 10.0 is the latest ,
>>> therefore the current one .
>>>
>>> The current may be used as a symbolic link to the newest version number ,
>>> such as used by Debian .
>>>
>>>
>>> For example , for FreeBSD 9.0 RC1 , the ports directory name was
>>>
>>> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-9-current/Latest/
>>>
>>>
>>> which is NOT available now , and
>>>
>>>
>>> pkg_add -r *
>>>
>>> is giving error about directory not found .
>>>
>>>
>>> This is preventing testing and / or using efforts .
>>>
>>>
>>> I know , it is possible to rename local link names , but
>>> everyone is not so much knowledgeable .
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand your proposal.
>> In a month (er, two.  well, maybe three) when 9.0 is released, do you
>> propose that the svn HEAD be called:
>> (a) 10.0
>> (b) 9-CURRENT
>> (c) CURRENT
>> (d) something else
>>
>> I do not realy care for either (a) or (b), since (a) would imply that the
>> version is not changing, even as incompatible KBI/ABI changes are made.
>> Likewise for (b), once the KBI/ABI changes, HEAD is decidedly no longer a
>> form of '9'.
>>
>> -Ben Kaduk
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> During development of Version 9 , the name of directory was
> 
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-9-current/Latest/
> 
> During the 9.0 Release RC1 , the above name was used .
> 
> Before releasing the 9.0 Release RC2 , the above has been changed .
> 
> This change has broke the links in 9.0 Release RC1 .
> 
> When we look at the ftp sites ( including mirrors ) all of them
> has changed .
> 
> This naming structure is requiring re-structuring all of the directories
> over all ftp , and other sites .
> 
> This is a wasted effort .
> 
> Instead of doing this , a scheme like the following
> may be used :
> 
> 
> Instead of using /*-9-Current/ , use 10.0 for current .
> 
> Assume our main directory is the following :
> 
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/
> 
> As next directory , use 8.1 , 8.2 , 9.0 for current .
> 
> 
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/8.1/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/8.2/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/
> 
> All of the directories , for example ,
> ... ports
> ... release
> ... snapshot
> ... whatever is related to 8.2 , 9.0 will be under 8.2 or 9.0 ,
> in such a way that nowhere else a directory with name , for example ,
> 9.0 will exist ...
> 
> For example :
> 
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/ports/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/packages/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/snapshot/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/release/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/stable/
> 
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/doc/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/doc/handbook/
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/9.0/amd64/doc/man/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....
> 
> 
> 
> Explain to the people that 9.0 is the "Development" branch ,
> NOT for production use .
> 
> A single sentence to learn .
> 
> Another step may be to insert  an explicit
> warning message  into current motd file about "Development" status of 9.0 .
> 
> 
> When time comes to make a release of 9.0 , which a new development
> branch will be generated ,
> 
> take a copy of 9.0 , and rename this directory as 10.0 .
> 
> By using suitable find/replace scripts ,
> 
> find all occurrences of 9.0 with strict match and replace them by 10.0 .
> 
> 
> After generating directory 10.0 , propagate it to mirrors .
> 
> Please , notice that , NOTHING is changed for the 9.0 ,
> and NOTHING is broken with respect to generation of a new branch ,
> all over the world ....
> 
> 
> Then start to work on 10.0 ...
> Continue in that way .
> 
> Apply the similar steps to 9.0 for 9.1 :
> 
> Take a copy of 9.0 , rename it as 9.1 , ...
> 
> 
> Thank you very much .
> 
> Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"

Why do I have the feeling that this whole problem is simply a matter of
r225757 not being MFC-ed to stable/9?

http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add/main.c?r1=222035&r2=225757

Cheers,
Luchesar