IMO we should avoid unqualified "before" -- before what? Maybe "named the same as they were in svn, branches/yyyyQn"?

we might want to give suggestions about how/what to verify?

typo, recorded

but maybe "of the main branch is included in the new commit message on the quarterly branch."

IMO let's commit this non-ports change independently first

Do we generally do this today (as the first line after the $FreeBSD$)?

Another change we ought to commit independently first.

Another one we should update independently.

another early commit

When you change an anchor name, you do have to check that anything referencing it in the whole documentation also gets updated. I have no idea if it is the case for this one, just saying.

As the release packages are built from the current quarterly branch, it should probably say that this was only used a few times and before quarterly existed.

There is only one way, it involves creating a branch just before the port was removed, and merging it back to main, but I don't think anyone wants to do that because "history looks horrible" using the current git tools.

I'd say this paragraph should probably not be added.

There is no way for this to exist, unless git starts tracking moves and copies. The paragraph should probably not be added in the first place.

"build test" would be enough.

Maybe change to this, for historic reasons ?

I think this change is either wrong or incomplete.

This should probably be put before the whole "build your own" bit, so that people know they can install a binary package first.

No, we don't, I think we should remove this, and finally be done with having a comment at the start of the Makefile documented as a thing.

git does not care about the current directory, the diff always has a full path name, also, -C changes the directory, so cd ../.. and -C foo/bar is a no-op.

The only change is the location of the oneko.diff file, but poeple will figure out it is in the current directory anyway.

I think -v head is wrong here, the branch is named main, but maybe poudriere does something under the hood.

All this is no longer valid, when you git pull, it will fetch the new changes, and then it will either do nothing with an error if you have uncommitted changes, or try to merge the changes, which can fail with merge conflicts, but in any way, merging is not a good idea. One should run git pull --rebase to make sure no merge commits are introduced.

git diff will always diff the whole repository, not the current directory.

Even better :)

Or perhaps just drop that line (branches/RELENG_n_n_n) ?

Fair enough. We can always add something later on.

Will do.

Yes.

Ok, the quarterly branch will hopefully loose the branches/ prefix, so it should be removed here too.

Typo here Tfor his

/branches/yyyyQn -> yyyyQn ?

what we have is release/x.y.z

what we currently have is n-eol without prefix

we don't have RELENG_n_n_n branches, they are tags (in below)

And the description sounds weird to me. Do we have literally a yyyyQn branch (and points to the latest quarterly branch)?

I think just mentioning ... which represent the quarterly branches, (e.g. 2021Q2) should be fine.

(While that's a good idea to have a quarterly branch points to the latest one.)

Git repository

Git appears actually to DTRT with readded ports- the old history is tacked on just fine. I think that part of addport can just go, as I suggested in the original discussion.

Unfortunately copies it doesn't do well, but that's not in scope here.

This section can just go.

I rephrased it a bit, hopefully more clear now.

Also slightly rewritten the next section (moving a port) to not have dangling textual references to the now removed sections.

Legacy GitHub mirror is at https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-ports-legacy.git , which I don't think we need to mention. We just need link to https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/mirrors/#_external_mirrors (and add ports) there.

cgit is not mirror, it's web interface to git repository. so maybe:
The cgit repository web browser is at https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports.git

maybe we can remove mentioning to master now?

what we have is release/x.y.z, e.g. release/13.0.0, note it is . not _.

The psvn script has already been removed from the ports repository, and it should be an easy conflict?

This has been marked done but not changed?

freebsd -> FreeBSD

freebsd -> FreeBSD

This has been marked done but not changed?

release/x_y_z -> release/x.y.z

I suggest adding:

While note that the "merge" concept in git is different than svn. What we actually do is using cherry-pick to apply patch from the specified commit in `main` to the target branch.