From owner-freebsd-ports Sat May 12 21:11:33 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com [24.0.95.108]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2FA137B424 for ; Sat, 12 May 2001 21:11:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from pat@databits.net) Received: from bsod ([24.5.63.190]) by femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id <20010513041128.MWMQ24113.femail12.sdc1.sfba.home.com@bsod>; Sat, 12 May 2001 21:11:28 -0700 Message-ID: <003201c0db62$c8cba0c0$0200a8c0@bsod> From: "Patrick Li" To: "David W. Chapman Jr." , References: <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> <023401c0db5d$7838be40$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010512223512.O29602@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> <023e01c0db5f$0e2d4dc0$931576d8@inethouston.net> <001f01c0db62$7bbaede0$0200a8c0@bsod> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 00:11:28 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2465.0003 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2465.0003 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Another thing should be changed if it remains the way it is now is pkg-descr since both are identical -pat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Li" To: "David W. Chapman Jr." ; Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2001 12:09 AM Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 > I can't agree more than what David said here. Its a fact that both are > stable and is not in the development stage anymore. 2.2.0 is stable and has > more features and bugs to sort out and between samba versions 2.0.9 and > 2.2.0 is quite a big change. I noticed a lot more features that was not > present with 2.0.9 but 2.0.9 is still preferred by me since there are still > some stuff like bugs needed to be worked on in 2.2.0 and some prefer 2.2.0 > for the additional features, testing, or whatever it may be. Well naming one > samba and one to samba-stable or just copy samba to samba-stable is not > technically correct since both are stable. Keeping them samba and > samba-devel, well, wont also be technically be correct since both are not in > development stage anymore but another way of looking at it, keeping > samba-devel to 2.2.x, some people may think that 2.2.0 still have bugs to > fix and not as stable as 2.0.9. Hehe maybe we all should join the *cough* > debate team. :) > > Patrick Li > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David W. Chapman Jr." > To: "Will Andrews" > Cc: "Will Andrews" ; "Patrick Li" > ; > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 11:44 PM > Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 > > > > I really don't care how its done, I just am waiting on someone who can do > > it, do it in a way that pleases them so we can stop this thread already :) > > But I don't think it should be samba-stable, because both 2.0.9 and 2.2.0 > > are considered stable, its just that 2.0.9 has all the known bugs found > and > > some are still popping up with 2.2.0. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Will Andrews" > > To: "David W. Chapman Jr." > > Cc: "Will Andrews" ; "Patrick Li" > > ; > > Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 10:35 PM > > Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1 > > > > > > > On Sat, May 12, 2001 at 10:33:25PM -0500, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > > > > 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. > > > > > > So repocopy samba to samba-stable and have 3 levels of samba support. > > > > > > -- > > > 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 > > > > > 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