From owner-freebsd-ports Tue May 7 01:48:07 1996 Return-Path: owner-ports Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id BAA25249 for ports-outgoing; Tue, 7 May 1996 01:48:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA25242 for ; Tue, 7 May 1996 01:48:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.7.5/8.6.9) id BAA02514; Tue, 7 May 1996 01:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 01:47:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199605070847.BAA02514@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> To: chuckr@Glue.umd.edu CC: FreeBSD-Ports@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: (message from Chuck Robey on Mon, 6 May 1996 22:38:19 -0400 (EDT)) Subject: Re: Tcl75/tk41 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * Maybe it's time to consider tossing the other tcl versions we've * accumulated in ports, and rename things to tcl/tk again. At least, I'd * like to hear some comments from anyone else who's experimented with stuff. No, we are not going to do this. The only renaming, if anything, would be tcl/tk -> tcl73/tk36. We have learned our lesson, and it is: if we have a port that is depended from a lot of other ports, and the authors do not preserve backward compatibility, we can't have only one version of it. I doesn't make sense to rename tcl75/tk41 to tcl/tk; when tcl76/tk42 come out, we'll have to do the same thing all over again. Satoshi