Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:23:55 -0300 From: Fernan Aguero <fernan@iib.unsam.edu.ar> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: What to do with Mozilla Message-ID: <20031015202355.GF34747@iib.unsam.edu.ar> In-Reply-To: <1066247415.721.50.camel@gyros> References: <1066244507.721.37.camel@gyros> <2F7A3BB4-FF45-11D7-881B-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <20031015193848.GE34747@iib.unsam.edu.ar> <1066247415.721.50.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
+----[ Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> (15.Oct.2003 16:50): | | mozilla-vendor has a purpose. Mozilla 1.0 and now 1.4 are the vendor | branches. That is, they are the branches that browsers such as Netscape | are spun from. The name vendor means that this browser can be used by | other vendors to create Mozilla-based products. They can be assured of | utmost stability at the cost of new features. | | Joe | +----] OK, I guess I now get it. So, according to what you say, the latest 'vendor' version is 1.4. And 1.5, being just released, has not yet been blessed as the 'vendor' branch. Am I right? So, assuming I'm right, I guess that we (you?) should wait for the mozilla people to bless 1.5 as a 'vendor' branch. If this has not yet happened (and until this happens) perhaps it is ok to have a port of 1.4 as the mozilla-vendor branch. But then if other mozilla-based ports (firebird et al) are also updated, perhaps there is no need for it. And then we are at the beginning of this thread again :) Sorry for not being more useful. I suppose that the maintainers of mozilla-based ports are the ones who should raised their voices now. Fernan PS: thanks for the explanation -- F e r n a n A g u e r o http://genoma.unsam.edu.ar/~fernan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031015202355.GF34747>