From owner-freebsd-gnome Tue Feb 12 11:46:31 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from shumai.marcuscom.com (rdu57-28-046.nc.rr.com [66.57.28.46]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CC3637B41F; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:46:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (marcus@localhost) by shumai.marcuscom.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g1CJigh59087; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:44:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) X-Authentication-Warning: shumai.marcuscom.com: marcus owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:44:42 -0500 (EST) From: Joe Clarke To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Naming cheme for GNOME2 ports In-Reply-To: <3C695911.5BAB5E89@FreeBSD.org> Message-ID: <20020212144402.K57748-100000@shumai.marcuscom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > What do people think about naming scheme for the GNOME2 core > components that already have their GNOME1 counterparts in the tree > (i.e. gnomefoo-1.x.x vs. gnomefoo-1.99.x)? Should we just add `2' > suffix, or something like `-devel'? Any ideas are appreciated. I like the 2 suffix (e.g. gnomefoo2-1.99.x). Joe > > -Maxim > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message