upgrade path for distributions

[Alan DeKok]

Peter Nixon wrote:
> Yeah, for the record though, I am all for using /etc/freeradius and 
> using /usr/sbin/freeradiusd as the binary.

  Yeah.  That change should be made before 2.0 is released...

> We should keep in mind however that there are distros that maintain backwards 
> compatibility and support for up to 7 years. I am not saying we should go 
> out of our way, but if its not difficult we should address any major 
> security issues found in the 1.1.x branch for a while to come at least..

  Yes.

> New features for 1.1.x would of course be a complete waste of energy.

  I just converted the entire CVS tree (including history) to Mercurial.
 It's smaller than the CVS tree, but still about 35M.  It took an hour
or so on my laptop.  I'll put it up on hg.freeradius.org.  After that, I
may just start using it full-time, while syncing CVS & mercurial.

  What does this have to do with 1.1.x?  If we're using a cheap & sane
version control system, it's easier to back-port fixes, and it's easier
to pull in features.

  e.g. I'd prefer to put third-party patches into an "untrusted" tree,
where they won't be lost... if they stay on web sites or on mailing
lists, they will get lost.

  And git?  All I can say is "git commit" versus "git commit -a".  Ouch.

  If git ends up being superior to mercurial, they two systems are
compatible enough that the trees can be converted.

  Alan DeKok.