Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2004 02:30:08 +0400 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@ciam.ru> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: PORTDOCS in the Porter's Handbook Message-ID: <40D4BE70.5010009@ciam.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040619195055.GA93429@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20040619122336.GA72313@comp.chem.msu.su> <40D47E01.3080204@ciam.ru> <20040619195055.GA93429@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yar Tikhiy wrote: > Frankly, such a thought crossed my mind, too. But in order to make > a statement that will stand for ages, we must decide here first what > is the status of the old and new ways for package listing doc files. > Possible choices include: > > a) either of them may be used at porter's option; > b) the old way is documented so that the audience can see > how legacy ports work, but porters are encouraged to use the > new way, PORTDOCS, when creating or updating ports; I think b) will be more preferably. But portmgr@ should give an approvement. -- Sem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?40D4BE70.5010009>