Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 16:41:35 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> Cc: sobomax@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org, Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 Message-ID: <XFMail.010512164135.jdp@polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <01b601c0db3c$5b02ba40$931576d8@inethouston.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > So how do we have both ports exist without confusing people by > keeping samba 2.2.0 as samba devel, because I've gotten a few emails > about people wondering about its stability. I don't think there is a way to get rid of questions like that when you have ports for two different versions. If you renamed them to "samba-stable" and "samba" then people would still ask whether samba was "stable enough." If you renamed them to "samba-a" and "samba-b", folks would want to know what the difference was. Certain people in the world just ask questions like that, and there's nothing that can be done about it. :-) John To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.010512164135.jdp>