Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 22:23:46 -0600 From: Ade Lovett <ade@lovett.com> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@freebsd.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: final call: VERSION variable Message-ID: <20000329222346.F312@lovett.com> In-Reply-To: <200003300345.TAA12994@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>; from asami@freebsd.org on Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 07:45:15PM -0800 References: <200003300345.TAA12994@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 07:45:15PM -0800, Satoshi Asami wrote: > I haven't gotten much response. Are people really okay with this? It > is a pretty large change, it will touch almost every single Makefile > in the tree and will change the way the Makefiles look forever. > > [snip] The only thing that worries me about this is that "it will touch almost every single Makefile". Now, there have been sporadic threads about the "Version required" comment at the top, which, if we delete it, will also touch every single Makefile, so instead of two sweeps through the tree, if we combine them, we only have one. In fact, I'm not entirely sure that *any* part of the current Makefile header is needed, so things would look like: # $FreeBSD$ # PORTNAME=foo VERSION=1.2 After all, if someone is really interested in who created the port (and when), as opposed to the current maintainer (who may be the same person), then I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this someone would be able to read CVS logs and figure it out from there. -aDe -- Ade Lovett, Austin, TX. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000329222346.F312>