Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      31 Mar 2000 00:48:30 -0800
From:      asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: final call: VERSION variable
Message-ID:  <vqcem8r1q5d.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: Kris Kennaway's message of "Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:30:40 -0800 (PST)"
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003302228500.78667-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
By the way, I forgot to mention that one of the nice things about the
PORTNAME/VERSION change is that we can add an optional REVISION field
in the future without screwing up Latest links and all the other
stuff, if we decide to go this direction.

 * From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>

 * It needs to be developed further by someone before we could adopt/reject
 * it, I agree. I only mentioned it because it was related to the topic under
 * discussion and we were chatting about it the other day on IRC. At this

Also, Red Hat does this already.  Not that we have to follow suit, but
it's not like a totally original (and absurd) idea.

I'm not sure if it's really necessary, but we have done some things in
the past (often involving shared libraries) that would have had
benefited from an additional revision field in the package name.

Satoshi


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqcem8r1q5d.fsf>