From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 9 13:57:13 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 6615E16A407 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:57:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bofh@redwerk.com) Received: from office.redwerk.com (office.redwerk.com [85.90.206.104]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC74143D5A for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:57:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bofh@redwerk.com) Received: from bofh by office.redwerk.com with local (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1GWvd9-000EdQ-VK for freebsd-java@freebsd.org; Mon, 09 Oct 2006 16:57:19 +0300 Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 16:57:19 +0300 From: Eugeny N Dzhurinsky To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20061009135719.GA56224@office.redwerk.com> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org References: <768690DD58883C4FAA0C089A534F94DF2054DE@intexch02.int.appriss.com> <54A56D47DC749F45C4291FD0@rambutan.pingpong.net> <452286C2.3030902@appriss.com> <273C02EB81D51F8607AEB1A4@rambutan.pingpong.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <273C02EB81D51F8607AEB1A4@rambutan.pingpong.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) 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: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 13:57:13 -0000 > >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. I prefer to have port of Eclipse 3.1 be updated rather than get separate Eclipse 3.2 port. -- Eugene N Dzhurinsky