From owner-cvs-ports Sun Dec 29 14:09:41 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id OAA14506 for cvs-ports-outgoing; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 14:09:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from h.ve.sci.fi (h.ve.sci.fi [194.215.87.6]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id OAA14480; Sun, 29 Dec 1996 14:09:26 -0800 (PST) Received: (from ville@localhost) by h.ve.sci.fi (8.8.4/8.7.3) id AAA00858; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 00:07:19 +0200 (EET) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 00:07:19 +0200 (EET) Message-Id: <199612292207.AAA00858@h.ve.sci.fi> From: Ville Eerola To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Cc: max@wide.ad.jp, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/fetchmail Makefile ports/mail/fetchmail/filesmd5 In-Reply-To: <199612290016.QAA16189@baloon.mimi.com> References: <199612282149.XAA00485@h.ve.sci.fi> <199612290016.QAA16189@baloon.mimi.com> X-Mailer: VM Version 5.93 (beta) under GNU Emacs 19.31.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Satoshi Asami writes: > * Well... I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. For the current > * situation it is ok, but who knows what esr will do when we reach 2.9, > * and we begin approaching fetchmail-3.0? Maybe it is best to do the > * change now, and if the patchlevels start reappearing change it back > * again. > > I thought about that too, but IMO we shouldn't have used the ".0" > patchlevel anyway. We could have just used x.y, then x.y.1 and x.y.2 > and so on if (and only if) the author starts adding patches (o' the day). Well, this is perhaps the cleanest way to go. In any case it applies to the current situation already (now that max did the change...) ;-) So, let's use this approach in the future for the fetchmail port. Regards, Ville -- Ville Eerola | Powered by ve@sci.fi | FreeBSD