From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 19 22:13:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D624E1065673 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 22:13:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (unknown [IPv6:2607:f678:1010::34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02288FC17 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 22:13:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id n6JMDn8h030060 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:13:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id n6JMDnfb030059; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fbsd61 by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA03037; Sun, 19 Jul 09 15:02:49 PDT Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:00:07 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: johans@stack.nl Message-Id: <4a639767.S1hn5ZaapukKlu8e%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20090719133239.GA24910@mud.stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <20090719133239.GA24910@mud.stack.nl> User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: smalltalk-3.0.5 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 22:13:50 -0000 Johan van Selst wrote: > ... versions 3.0.5 and 3.1 were both released on the very same > day: 3.0.5 is not older than 3.1. The former was a stable bugfix > release and 3.1 came with serveral new features (and unfortunately > no perfect backwards compatibility for running older programs) ... > > Right now, many programs will work with either version, and > some even require the new 3.1 features ... I'll look in to > these issues and will probably switch the port to 3.1(.x) soon. Given the backwards compatibility issues, might it be worthwhile to create a new smalltalk31 or smalltalk-devel port, or rename the current port to something like smalltalk30x, so that the older version can remain available for use with older programs?