On Saturday April 02 2016 19:27:38 Rainer Müller wrote: > This is not in any way slower than rsync. With no actual changes, a
Maybe not if you do it very regularly. That quickly changes once you start increasing the intervals, in my experience. > > It seems to me that it is above all confusing that _resources are looked up > > differently than the rest of a ports tree > > And it would be even more confusing if every single file in _resources > used a different strategy. Was I proposing that? > # sources.conf > rsync://rsync.macports.org/release/tarballs/ports.tar [default] > file:///Users/raimue/unsubmitted-ports > > Now as soon as a port is added to the official tree my unsubmitted > Portfile will no longer be used. Does that mean port groups in > unsubmitted-ports would never be used at all? Let me return the question: would you be surprised if port groups from the latter were overridden/masked by port groups of the same name in the former (official) tree - just like ports are? I guess that typically, if a port comes with a PortGroup for use by other ports that are somehow dependents, you'd commit both the port and the PortGroup. > I am not saying this cannot be changed, but we need a plan how it should > be handled for each of the files in _resources. Afterwards it could be > implemented, but it looks complicated to me. I think we agree that there's no need to change anything for the other files in _resources, only for PortGroups. Maybe it would become easier conceptually if PortGroups were moved to a different location outside of _resources (preferably only 1 level down from the tree's root)? R _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
