From owner-cvs-ports  Sat Dec 28 16:18:08 1996
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id QAA05068
          for cvs-ports-outgoing; Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:18:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.8])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id QAA05062;
          Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:18:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from baloon.mimi.com (sjx-ca56-03.ix.netcom.com [205.186.122.67]) by dfw-ix8.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA03806; Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:16:56 -0800
Received: (from asami@localhost) by baloon.mimi.com (8.8.4/8.6.12) id QAA16189; Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:16:52 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:16:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199612290016.QAA16189@baloon.mimi.com>
To: Ville.Eerola@vehome.pp.sci.fi
CC: max@wide.ad.jp, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org,
        cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199612282149.XAA00485@h.ve.sci.fi> (message from Ville Eerola on Sat, 28 Dec 1996 23:49:00 +0200 (EET))
Subject: Re: cvs commit:  ports/mail/fetchmail Makefile ports/mail/fetchmail/filesmd5
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * Well... I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. For the current
 * situation it is ok, but who knows what esr will do when we reach 2.9,
 * and we begin approaching fetchmail-3.0? Maybe it is best to do the
 * change now, and if the patchlevels start reappearing change it back
 * again.

I thought about that too, but IMO we shouldn't have used the ".0"
patchlevel anyway.  We could have just used x.y, then x.y.1 and x.y.2
and so on if (and only if) the author starts adding patches (o' the day).

Satoshi