Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2002 17:35:23 -0700 From: Cy Schubert - CITS Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: john_m_cooper@yahoo.com Cc: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.ORG>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RFC: Putting mozilla-1.0 back in the tree Message-ID: <200209040035.g840ZOfw000584@cwsys.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Message from John Merryweather Cooper <john_m_cooper@yahoo.com> of "03 Sep 2002 14:41:13 PDT." <1031089275.1735.53.camel@PC016247.reshall.uidaho.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <1031089275.1735.53.camel@PC016247.reshall.uidaho.edu>, John
Merrywe
ather Cooper writes:
> Well, I'm not really arguing the point. :) Incrementing PORTEPOCH is
> the correct thing to do though. A HEADS UP when it's occurring so those
> of us who want to stay with 1.1 can would be real nice.
Now that the mozilla port has a PORTEPOCH of 2, the mozilla-devel port
should have its PORTEPOCH bumped from 1 to 2, else the development
version would appear to our ports infrastructure to be ancient in
relation to the production version. I think that this is counter to the
spirit of PORTEPOCH, because both ports register under the PORTNAME of
mozilla.
--
Cheers, Phone: 250-387-8437
Cy Schubert Fax: 250-387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/Alpha Team Email: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, CITS
Ministry of Management Services
Province of BC
FreeBSD UNIX: cy@FreeBSD.org
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?200209040035.g840ZOfw000584>