Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:36:08 +0200 From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: CVSROOT modules ports/shells Makefile ports/shells/bash3 Makefile distinfo pkg-deinstall pkg-descr pkg-install pkg-plist ports/shells/bash3/files patch-ac patch-af patch-bashline.c patch-builtins_shopt.def patch-config-bot.h ... Message-ID: <8C6EA0DC-EBB4-11D8-887A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <1092240804.731.11.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: >> When you think repocopying bash3 -> bash is >> a good idea, just do it. > [...] > Just file the PR, and the copy will be done. Difficult to decide: I believe we have a valid reason to have openldap21 and openldap22 in the tree, like bash2 and bash3 or apache13 and apache2. I already took care of deleting openldap1 and openldap20, and we could do the same with bash1 (and probably security/cyrus-sasl (which is an old 1.5 version, used only by very few ports)). Do we have an rationale which port should be in what directory? E.g. `no number -> current release', `number -> development or old version' or some other scheme? And how do we fit libxml/libxml2 into the pattern? -Oliver
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8C6EA0DC-EBB4-11D8-887A-00039312D914>