From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Sep 17 12:21:27 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1DC737B401; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 12:21:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bobo.thehutt.org (pcp709198pcs.alxndr01.va.comcast.net [68.49.240.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8291943E88; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 12:21:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jerry@thehutt.org) Received: from [10.0.3.13] (helo=nomad.thehutt.org) by bobo.thehutt.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17rNvK-000IJ1-00; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:22:14 -0400 Received: from jerry by nomad.thehutt.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 17rNuR-0005sF-00; Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:21:19 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:21:19 -0400 From: Jerry A! To: Joe Marcus Clarke Cc: Joe Kelsey , freebsd-gnome , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/42870: mozilla-devel should be updated to 1.2a Message-ID: <20020917192119.GA22546@nomad.thehutt.org> Reply-To: jerry@thehutt.org References: <3D8775E9.4050409@mail.flyingcroc.net> <1032287836.331.66.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> <20020917184537.GA22391@nomad.thehutt.org> <1032288591.331.71.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> <3D877DA3.6070003@mail.flyingcroc.net> <1032289994.331.76.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1032289994.331.76.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Broken Toys Unlimited Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 03:13:14PM -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: : : This then begs the question of should I make this change now so close to : the release? I don't want things to ship out with a lot of popular : pieces in a broken state. While people might not agree with the Mozilla : naming scheme right now, the ports do function. I would argue that the ports don't function to meet a user's expectations. By-and-large, mozilla-1.1 is mozilla in the public's eye. If they install that version (even if it's called mozilla-devel) and then can't install plugins, then I believe that we're doing a dis-service. Regardless, it may be a non-real-issue(tm). If you go with the advocated naming scheme, then mozilla-1.1 will work properly, with plugins. There will just need to be tweaks made for flashplugin and plugger. Whether people feel comfortable waiting until after the ports freeze to have correctly installed plugins for mozilla-devel and mozilla-vendor is the question that should be asked. --Jerry Open-Source software isn't a matter of life or death... ...It's much more important than that! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message