Date: 15 Apr 2000 03:11:49 -0700 From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: cvs-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, brian@Awfulhak.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/arpwatch Makefile Message-ID: <vqcog7bad22.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: David O'Brien's message of "Sat, 15 Apr 2000 03:04:00 -0700" References: <200004150943.CAA83131@freefall.freebsd.org> <vqcr9c7ae52.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000415030400.A7222@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>
* > Why is this bogus?
*
* In that it isn't a direct conversion of DISTNAME to PORT{NAME,VERSION}
* and thus broke ``make checksum''.
That doesn't make it bogus. I explicitly told you guys that you can
fix the version strings along the way if you find something that
doesn't conform to the standard. Since you guys will be looking at
every single (TM) Makefile's versions strings it seemed like as good a
time as any.
However, I may have told the above to only the early sign-ups, so if
you (David) didn't know it, sorry about that.
* Not arguing with that. I was just making the port build and produce the
* same package [name] as before the conversion. I was leaving the issue of
* a bad version number [Handbook-wise] to Brian [maintainer] to decided how
* he wanted to renumber it.
No offense to Brian or any other maintainer, but if you look at the
ports tree, it has clearly gotten to the point that we need to enforce
the package naming rules by fixing them up ourselves rather than
leaving them to the maintainers.
That said, if you (Brian) have a different idea of how the version
string should be spelled, go right ahead and change it.
Satoshi
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqcog7bad22.fsf>