From owner-freebsd-mozilla Wed Jun 10 00:53:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA21274 for freebsd-mozilla-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:53:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-mozilla@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from wartch.rih.org (ppp-207-214-209-82.snfc21.pacbell.net [207.214.209.82]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA21258 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:52:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peterh@wartch.rih.org) Received: from wartch.rih.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wartch.rih.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA03618 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:52:43 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peterh@wartch.rih.org) Message-Id: <199806100752.AAA03618@wartch.rih.org> To: freebsd-mozilla@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: More on the death of freebsd-mozilla Reply-To: psh1@cornell.edu Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 00:52:43 -0700 From: Peter Haight Sender: owner-freebsd-mozilla@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Well, I'm not too concerned about major innovations to mozilla from the FreeBSD community, but I'd like to see lots of bug fixes. The major problem I have with v4 is the bugs. Are bug fixes from the FreeBSD community getting into Mozilla's repository? If they are, then the only reason I can see for maintaining the separate repository is because you can use cvsup. What are the chances of convincing the Mozilla people to try something like cvsup? Anonymous CVS is ok, but cvsup seems to work better for me. Are there some advantages for the Mozilla group such as reduced server load or network bandwith? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mozilla" in the body of the message