Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 12 May 2001 23:13:35 -0500
From:      "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net>
To:        "Patrick Li" <pat@databits.net>, <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1
Message-ID:  <026701c0db63$14717900$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> <023401c0db5d$7838be40$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010512223512.O29602@casimir.physics.purdue.edu> <023e01c0db5f$0e2d4dc0$931576d8@inethouston.net> <001f01c0db62$7bbaede0$0200a8c0@bsod> <003201c0db62$c8cba0c0$0200a8c0@bsod>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I can submit a pr to change it if you could suggest what you think it should
be, but it seems like everyone is very busy so it probably won't happen
soon.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Li" <pat@databits.net>
To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net>;
<freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: samba-2.2.0_1


> 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" <pat@databits.net>
> To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net>;
> <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org>
> 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 <pat@databits.net>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net>
> > To: "Will Andrews" <will@physics.purdue.edu>
> > Cc: "Will Andrews" <will@physics.purdue.edu>; "Patrick Li"
> > <pat@databits.net>; <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
> > 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" <will@physics.purdue.edu>
> > > To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net>
> > > Cc: "Will Andrews" <will@physics.purdue.edu>; "Patrick Li"
> > > <pat@databits.net>; <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
> > > 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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?026701c0db63$14717900$931576d8>