Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 01:37:46 -0500 From: Steve Price <steve@FreeBSD.ORG> To: "David W. Chapman Jr." <dwcjr@inethouston.net> Cc: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Reminder samba-devel -> samba22 Message-ID: <20010424013746.W646@bsd.havk.org> In-Reply-To: <085e01c0cc88$4048b820$931576d8@inethouston.net>; from dwcjr@inethouston.net on Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:31:52AM -0500 References: <080e01c0cc84$0e693860$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010424090458.A22159@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <083601c0cc86$07e1dae0$931576d8@inethouston.net> <20010424091843.B22159@ringworld.oblivion.bg> <085e01c0cc88$4048b820$931576d8@inethouston.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 01:31:52AM -0500, David W. Chapman Jr. wrote: > At a first glance it might seem too many, but I'd like to atleast keep the > 2.0 branch in the tree for a while incase 2.2 has some bugs that 2.0 does > not. I found one of them that existed in 2.2 and not 2.0, but luckily they > were able to fix it before it was time to release 2.2 > > > I think Maxim Sobolev's suggestion about samba20 and samba was most > > to the point, although, with the need for a samba-devel port, there get > > to be three Samba ports.. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. See the Tcl/Tk ports for an example of having numerous versions of a particular piece of software in the Ports Collection. Having samba and samba-devel will be a nightmare - today's devel is tomorrow's stable! The only good way of handling this (IMHO) is to have samba20, samba22, samba23, ... -steve 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?20010424013746.W646>