Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 10:50:04 -0700 From: Joe Kelsey <joek@mail.flyingcroc.net> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Referendum on the recent Mozilla changes Message-ID: <3D7647CC.4030805@flyingcroc.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think you have confused the issue. > My question is this: would it be better to leave things the way they > are, have www/mozilla track the quarterly stable releases, and have > www/mozilla-devel track the _latest_ release (e.g. 1.1)? Or, would it > be better to do things like the way gcc does it? For example, create > a www/mozilla10, www/mozilla11, etc.? The above should read that www/mozilla track the vendor 1.0.x branch and mozilla-devel track the quarterly stable release. There is *no* schedule for ever updating the 1.0 vendor branch except to track Netscape releases. There is a rumor of a 1.0.1 release, but no evidence of it so far. My objection is that, tradionally, x-devel in ports has been used to track temporary, beta releases of software, and the x-devel ports eventually disappear, or fall fallow. mozilla-devel would bring to mind tracking the cvs trunk or some sort of alpha or beta quality release. Clearly, the main mozilla.org stable branch point is the quarterly releases, called 1.1, 1.2, etc. There is also a long-term vendor-stable branch for tracking Netscape releases, called 1.0.x. There is no information available about what is going on with the 1.0.x branch outside of Netscape. My contention is that the *normal* mozilla track should be the quarterly release and that this port should be www/mozilla. If we also want to track the vendor-release branch, we need to call it something else, such as www/mozilla10. If and when mozilla.org releases a new 1.0.x officially (which they have not done), then this release can track it. If some other port (such as galeon) decides to commit to a particular branch point, then we will have to make some sort of accomodation. Currently, the galeon 1/2 situation is up in the air and there has been no notice from the galeon camp that they intend to commit to a particular mozilla release other than that they are tracking the gtk2 bug. I believe that the rational thing is to have www/mozilla track the quarterly stable releases (1.1, 1.2, etc.) and to have a special vendor-branch for tracking the mozilla.org long-lived 1.0.x branch, named however everyone thinks, but www/mozilla10 seems right to me. /Joe 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?3D7647CC.4030805>