Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 17:45:52 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net> To: obrien@FreeBSD.org Cc: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/automake Makefile distinfo pkg-plist ports/devel/automake/files patch-ab patch-ad Message-ID: <38873.1004024752@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:18:04 MST." <20011025081804.F28706@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:18:04 MST, "David O'Brien" wrote: > Version proliferation. Take tripwire for instance. We now have 3 > versions in ports. In fact "tripwire" which many would assume is the > latest and greatest is the oldest version. In the old days, Satoshi > wanted there to be a very good reason for duplicates of ports. Most of this mess came in through abuse of the rules that allowed foo and and foo-latest, where foo-latest could exist because 1) It was incompatible with a previous release. 2) It was bleeding edge. I still think that's healthy and you haven't expressed disapproval. The problem is that people don't seem to know how to deal with the transition of foo-latest to foo. What happens when it's time for foo to "contain" what foo-latest currently "contains"? I think an explanation of this procedure might go partway toward a solution, although the other part involves portmgr policing the situation for a while until sanity returns to this aspect of ports culture. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?38873.1004024752>