Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 17:05:53 -0400 From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com> To: Andreas Klemm <andreas@klemm.gtn.com> Cc: Edward Wolpert <wolpert@methodsystems.com>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Andreas Klemm <andreas@FreeBSD.ORG>, Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/databases/p5-DBD-Pg Makefile ports/databas Message-ID: <20000827170553.V57333@jade.chc-chimes.com> In-Reply-To: <20000827225820.A37044@titan.klemm.gtn.com>; from andreas@klemm.gtn.com on Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 10:58:21PM %2B0200 References: <20000827202609.A29786@titan.klemm.gtn.com> <XFMail.000827125205.wolpert@methodsystems.com> <20000827152643.U57333@jade.chc-chimes.com> <20000827225820.A37044@titan.klemm.gtn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 10:58:21PM +0200, Andreas Klemm wrote:
> Excuse me, but why do we then have/take the extra overhead
> of a repository copy if a new/parallel port with version numer
> is only intended to have a short/temporary lifetime ?
So we don't force beta/current/bleeding edge ports on our users.
> Then repository copies doesn't make sense and all the involved
> work so far would be for nuts and additionally pollutes the
> Attic for no reason !
Well, if the port never made it in a release, it doesn't pollute.
In any event, the gain of having a stable and current port outways
the cost of the repository copy. pgsql7 is now the stable port,
so it goes into postgresql.
--
Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc.
billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000827170553.V57333>