Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 22:33:25 -0500 From: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> To: "Will Andrews" <will@physics.purdue.edu> Cc: "Patrick Li" <pat@databits.net>, <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 Message-ID: <023401c0db5d$7838be40$931576d8@inethouston.net> References: <XFMail.010512163006.jdp@polstra.com> <01b601c0db3c$5b02ba40$931576d8@inethouston.net> <002d01c0db41$70cdda30$0200a8c0@bsod> <01c201c0db57$7273c000$931576d8@inethouston.net> <004f01c0db59$9e6fe740$0200a8c0@bsod> <021c01c0db5a$6b946200$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010512222441.N29602@casimir.physics.purdue.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
But its not in development anymore, its like calling XFree86-4, XFree86-4-devel. I wouldn't mind keeping up the -devel branch of samba for samba 3.0, but I currently can't do that without making 2.0.9 unavailable, which a few people still need access to. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Will Andrews" <will@physics.purdue.edu> To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> Cc: "Patrick Li" <pat@databits.net>; <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 10:24 PM Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 10:11:36PM -0500, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > > I'm on your side, but the people who are having problems accepting it are > > the people who can actually change it, so that's the current problem. > > FWIW, I think keeping "samba-devel" is a fine idea. People who can't be > bothered to make their own evaluation are stuck. > > Changing the name of the port for the sake of avoiding these people > sounds like a bad idea to me. > > -- > wca > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message > 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?023401c0db5d$7838be40$931576d8>