From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Feb 4 2:59:11 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBE837B401 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 02:59:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout02.sul.t-online.com (mailout02.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.17]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 960F643F9B for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 02:59:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from fwd07.sul.t-online.de by mailout02.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18g0n8-0003Xd-04; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 11:59:02 +0100 Received: from Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (520065502893-0001@[217.229.213.149]) by fmrl07.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 18g0n2-1grxPkC; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:58:56 +0100 Received: from Magelan.Leidinger.net (Magelan [192.168.1.1]) by Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h14AwsbL086775; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:58:54 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Magelan.Leidinger.net (netchild@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Magelan.Leidinger.net (8.12.6/8.12.6) with SMTP id h14Aws3d072982; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:58:54 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:58:54 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: alane@geeksrus.net, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lame > lame-devel Message-Id: <20030204115854.65388cec.Alexander@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20030203134841.GA88265@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> References: <20030203134841.GA88265@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.9claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Sender: 520065502893-0001@t-dialin.net Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 08:48:41 -0500 "AlanE [admin]" wrote: > Does anyone else find it strange that lame-devel is an older, somewhat > broken port, when compared to lame? Maybe it should be retired and left > to live out its golden years in the Attic. Just a thought... I expect a new beta version of LAME in some months (perhaps one or two). Then lame-devel would be nice to have. I know we can bring it back to life from the Attic, but wouldn't it be enough to mark it broken until then? Bye, Alexander. -- Loose bits sink chips. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91 3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message