Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 10:04:42 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Jim Mock <jim@blues.ghis.net> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: xchat & xchat-devel? Message-ID: <19990712100441.B71904@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <19990712183933.A64188@blues.ghis.net>; from Jim Mock on Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 06:39:33PM %2B1000 References: <19990712132238.A36959@blues.ghis.net> <19990712010458.B57377@dragon.nuxi.com> <19990712181355.B55317@blues.ghis.net> <199907120822.BAA68238@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <19990712183933.A64188@blues.ghis.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I don't know that it'll replace the current xchat port.. I mean, when > it gets to 1.1.10, 1.2.0 will probably become the stable version, and > 1.3.x the development tree (if they use their current version > numbering). Am I making sense with any of this? <IMHO> I ask again. Do we really need two xchat ports? Is the development version stable in your experience? Are there fundamental changes in the development version that once it is released, some people will want to stick with the previous version (perhaps forever)? Do people really need to be running the development version (in an easy to install port manner)? Does the development version fix bugs/problems with the currently released version? If not, then I would suggest either leaving the current xchat port we have as is, or upgrading it to the development version (because it is stable in your opinion) and just let people use that. MANY of us are becoming to hate the proliferage of -devel ports bloat. We finally got rid of the mkisofs-devel port and just made it the mkisofs port. It had much improved functionality, and the port maintainer just tests any new development versions of it before upgrading the port. Two ports that are justified in having two versions are bash1 and egcs-devel. A shell is something one uses everyday for almost every function. Bash2 changed a lot of fundamental stuff. Thus many people will never upgrade to bash2 from bash1. In the case of egcs-devel... we you certainly don't want to depend on a development version of a compiler that does in deed have fatal bugs in it at times (just like FreeBSD-CURRENT). You could say that we just shouldn't have the egcs-devel port then, but due to its size and complexity, if I didn't keep up with the EGCS people's changes it would be just too much effort to upgrade at once. (plus the egcs-devel version will become the base compiler of FreeBSD-CURRENT once it is released, so I can't mess up on this one) </IMHO> -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com -or- obrien@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?19990712100441.B71904>