Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 15:08:17 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193135] [NEW PORT] www/seahub: Seafile web server front end Message-ID: <bug-193135-13-TcTeHqD3Ys@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-193135-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-193135-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193135 --- Comment #31 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Jingfeng Yan from comment #30) > Why reviewboard-1.7.22 requires djblets, then it get a specific version of > djblets. If other application needs other version of djblets, why we can > not have a version of djblets for that app? I think you are asking the wrong question. The question is, why is seahub unable to use the latest version of djblets? This makes seahub look bad IMO. It's a bad situation. I wanted to avoid the situation *IF POSSIBLE*. If it's not possible, then fine, we bring back a legacy port. This kind of thing is why I avoid python. > That is why I am confused what is the policy for python pkg version port in > FreeBSD port system. Do I miss any important point from the other thread. It's just good practice not to have multiple versions of the same port. Avoid it where it's possible. Sometimes it can't be avoided. But I didn't want to make this call, I wanted the python@ team to give good advice. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-193135-13-TcTeHqD3Ys>