On 2026/03/03 20:22:20 Timofei Zhakov wrote: > > > Your understanding is correct. We may of course end up supporting more > > > than > > > one release at the same time (let's say 1.16 is released one year after > > > 1.15, then both will be supported for two years). > > > > This bastille means that there will be two LTS versions for quite some time > > and I cannot maintain both 1.15 and 1.16 in the LTS port, of course. > > > > > Without me fully understanding the FreeBSD port system it does seem like a > > > good idea to merge them - the -lts designation won't make any sense. > > > > Both ports can live side by side, but cannot be installed simultaneously, > > given that there are ports depending on this, you have to configure you > > preference in make.conf. > > > > From your explanation I would actually need to take the opposite approach. > > All releases are LTS ones and I can drop devel/subversion and keep > > devel/subversion-lts only, no? > > IMO not having a port that is named as just 'subversion' and letting > users to pick 'subversion-lts' instead might be slightly confusing. > Can subversion-lts be an alias to subversion?
Yes, this can be done, but how reasonable is this if there is ultimately just one version? We do this for parallel versions like Python where devel/python can be python310, python311, etc. and you set your default python version in make.conf. Same works for node, go, perl, ruby, you name it. I don't want to make things not too complicated of there is only one supported version over a longer span. Michael
