Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 12:53:24 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Gary Jennejohn <garyj@jennejohn.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the future of xemacs21 Message-ID: <20030422195324.GA65160@rot13.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <200304220850.h3M8ouGr003174@peedub.jennejohn.org> References: <200304220850.h3M8ouGr003174@peedub.jennejohn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 10:50:55AM +0200, Gary Jennejohn wrote: > Hello Porters, >=20 > xemacs-devel was just repo copied to xemacs to track the stable branch > of Xemacs. >=20 > The question now is, what do we do with xemacs21? xemacs-21.1.14, > which is what's in xemacs21, is now considered historical. But > there are so many other ports which depend on xemacs21 that it may > well be a good idea to keep xemacs21 around and create new ports > to track xemacs. >=20 > So I'd like to get a consensus. Do we delete xemacs21 after all the > ports which depend on it are updated to depend on xemacs? Or do we > want to keep xemacs21 and add new ports to depend on the new xemacs? Move over the ones that work and try to fix the others. Once nothing is left depending on xemacs21 it can be removed. Kris --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE+pZ20Wry0BWjoQKURAinIAKCKNdlUV8GD3XJL2XyGQ8VhzIXiWQCggTEQ l6I9ms4URewjSyWJKAuLoXE= =h1o1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gKMricLos+KVdGMg--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030422195324.GA65160>