Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 13:20:03 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Rene Ladan <rene@freebsd.org> Cc: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>, Tobias Rehbein <tobias.rehbein@web.de>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, Thomas Abthorpe <tabthorpe@freebsd.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/games/stonesoup Makefile distinfo pkg-descr pkg-plist ports/games/stonesoup/files patch-AppHdr.h patch-makefile patch-rltiles__Makefile Message-ID: <4C5F1173.5000803@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4C5F0768.10004@freebsd.org> References: <201008081759.o78Hxath039177@repoman.freebsd.org> <20100808193035.GB26232@FreeBSD.org> <4C5F0768.10004@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/08/2010 12:37, Rene Ladan wrote: > Actually there is nothing wrong with having SDL support in OPTIONS, I > merely followed the PR. If you can convince the maintainer to revert > factoring out SDL support, I'll be happy to make the corresponding commit. Personally I think we need a lot more slave ports. OPTIONS are great for people building the ports themselves, but if we're going to move to a model dominated by packages then more slave ports are a good thing. FWIW, Doug -- Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C5F1173.5000803>