Date: 17 Nov 2002 01:27:30 -0500 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org> To: Akinori MUSHA <knu@iDaemons.org> Cc: cvs@FreeBSD.org, FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@FreeBSD.org>, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Repo copies Message-ID: <1037514449.43391.21.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <86y97s2066.wl@daemon.musha.org> References: <1037512418.43391.11.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <86y97s2066.wl@daemon.musha.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sun, 2002-11-17 at 01:13, Akinori MUSHA wrote: > At 17 Nov 2002 00:53:39 -0500, > Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > www/galeon --> www/galeon2 > > www/mozilla-devel --> www/mozilla2 > > > > The reason for adding yet another Mozilla to the tree is so that we can > > build galeon2 packages. Without a separate mozilla2 port, mozilla-devel > > would be built with the default GTK 1 bindings, and galeon2 would fail > > to build. Thanks. > > I'm afraid mozilla2 would sound like Mozilla version 2.x. Wouldn't it > be nicer to name it mozilla-gtk2 or mozilla+gtk2 ? Or if GTK+ 2.x is > going to be the default before long, you may as well consider copying > mozilla to mozilla-gtk1 and updating mozilla to be built with GTK+ 2.x > instead. What do you think? Well, sobomax and I decided in the xxx2 naming convention for this type of thing. However, you and Kris have a valid point. There will most certainly be a Mozilla 2.x, and this is not that. We can't update mozilla to add GTK 2 support since it's mozilla-devel (1.2b) that has the hooks. But what about: www/mozilla-devel --> www/mozilla-devel-gtk2 ? Joe -- Joe Marcus Clarke FreeBSD GNOME Team :: marcus@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQA91zbRb2iPiv4Uz4cRAiaBAJ9cuVf8gTbccPR8xEJxiXGuMCJufwCeNe08 o6UKs8YW5arL6PEPiI8O0JQ= =jjk8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1037514449.43391.21.camel>