From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Jan 8 9:32:31 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from asgaard.whispering.org (208-241-93-179.hsacorp.net [208.241.93.179]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39BCF14FE2; Sat, 8 Jan 2000 09:32:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from will@blackdawn.com) Received: from shadow.blackdawn.com (23-125.008.popsite.net [209.69.197.125]) by asgaard.whispering.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA25010; Sat, 8 Jan 2000 12:32:15 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from will@blackdawn.com) Received: (from will@localhost) by shadow.blackdawn.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA11928; Sat, 8 Jan 2000 12:00:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from will) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3.1 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 12:00:21 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: Will Andrews From: Will Andrews To: (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Subject: Re: Qt/KDE/bsd.port.mk upgrade PRs imminent Cc: andreas@FreeBSD.ORG, se@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 08-Jan-00 Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote: > Why not "qt144"? I think the Qt tradition of having all version > numbers so we can have both versions in the tree at the same time > while we switch over is worth preserving. Because Qt 1.44 is compatible with all previous versions of Qt 1.4x? Seems like it would "replace" them. I think it would be easier to upgrade Qt 1.x later on, should Troll Tech ever decide t orelease any further versions. -- Will Andrews GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message