From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 3 15:50:36 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 C420516A407; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 15:50:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dsledge@appriss.com) Received: from intexch02.int.appriss.com (intexch02.int.appriss.com [63.126.72.108]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443E643D97; Tue, 3 Oct 2006 15:50:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dsledge@appriss.com) Received: from [10.11.3.10] ([10.11.3.10]) by intexch02.int.appriss.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 3 Oct 2006 11:50:29 -0400 Message-ID: <452286C2.3030902@appriss.com> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 11:50:26 -0400 From: David Sledge User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060915) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Palle Girgensohn References: <768690DD58883C4FAA0C089A534F94DF2054DE@intexch02.int.appriss.com> <54A56D47DC749F45C4291FD0@rambutan.pingpong.net> In-Reply-To: <54A56D47DC749F45C4291FD0@rambutan.pingpong.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2006 15:50:29.0720 (UTC) FILETIME=[A6DF2D80:01C6E703] Cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Eclipse 3.2 port (java/eclipse32) 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 15:50:36 -0000 Palle Girgensohn wrote: > > > --On fredag, september 01, 2006 19.54.17 -0400 David Sledge > wrote: > >> It looks like the safest thing to do is submit the port as >> java/eclipse32 >> and leave the existing java/eclipse port alone. As plugins get updated >> for the new port of eclipse version 3.2 we will eventually be able to >> remove the old port. I plan to submit the PR on Wednesday as I am >> currently away from my FreeBSD computer :( . Thank you for all your >> input, help and testing on this port. > > There is a patch release, 3.2.1. Will you consider adding those fixes, > i.e. updating the port to 3.2.1, or is it too late for that? I guess > we can always update the port later. > > I just stated, in another mail, that I'd rather see an update of the > old port of eclipse, we really don't need two different ports for > eclipse, but I guess just creating a new port is faster, and will fix > existing plugin ports quicker. Oh well... > > /Palle > Working on the build for 3.2.1 now. Hoping to have it done by the end of the day. We talked about updating the the old port on this mailing list and more people seemed to want it to be a separate port so we did not break the dependencies. I am getting more and more emails now supporting to update the existing eclipse port. I have no problem with that. I will ask again how many people would prefer updating the original eclipse port versus creating a new port? Please comment on this ASAP as I am working on an update to eclipse 3.2.1.