From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 3 12:20:23 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 323A116A4A7 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 12:20:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mlusetti@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.180]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FEE43D5A for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 12:20:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mlusetti@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id o67so2839750pye for ; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 05:20:17 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ZCuWWjN5G7b4ZprxLD7QFA6FxFtbE26UpxcmDuIca3NIAS7PKYTvHnfgi56g0QTM8+nZ/kJ3vX1CkkoTcLH+X4SRT2XcXWuWoGlp+dKfUEpceOOsb4JF21YdZIAtuqDSw+LeLEABb+PRdDdVb9IxIMTy8XYj9yv5Dcb9KrCjjRU= Received: by 10.35.119.8 with SMTP id w8mr14791851pym; Tue, 03 Oct 2006 05:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.48.16 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 05:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 14:20:17 +0200 From: "Massimo Lusetti" To: "Palle Girgensohn" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4518BED7.3050104@FreeBSD.org> <45197263.50505@appriss.com> Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org, Ronald Klop , David Sledge , Sergey Matveychuk Subject: Re: Will eclipse32 be committed before ports freeze? (pr ports/102993) X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:20:23 -0000 On 10/3/06, Palle Girgensohn wrote: > I agree that we don't need a repo copy, but I would like to go one step > further; we don't need two different versions of eclipse in the ports tree. > > There are about two dozen ports that rely on eclipse. Most of them can > probably easily be upgraded to work with eclispe-3.2. I'd prefer updating > the ports, and updating eclipse to 3.2. > > What do you think? That would be great. -- Massimo http://meridio.blogspot.com