Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 14:45:01 -0700 From: Joe Kelsey <joek@mail.flyingcroc.net> To: Jeremy Lea <reg@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Joe Kelsey <joek@mail.flyingcroc.net>, freebsd-gnome <freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Mozilla 1.1 is stable *not* devel. Message-ID: <3D767EDD.2010207@flyingcroc.net> References: <3D762C1D.4090609@flyingcroc.net> <20020904203332.GA20743@shale.csir.co.za> <3D767337.2090403@flyingcroc.net> <20020904213744.GB20743@shale.csir.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeremy Lea wrote: > Just because 1.1 happens to be a better browser than 1.0 is just how > things are. 1.2 might break compatibility with all of your plugins. Clearly, you did not read the manifesto. Every API is frozen for all of 1.x. Therefore, no intermediate release (1.0.1, 1.1, 1.2, etc) can change anything to do with the frozen API! > Things when't on like this all though the M's and 0.9.x releases. One > release would be good, another completely buggy, and another would break > all of the port's which depend on Mozilla. These ports will now follow > 1.0.x, probably for the next year. (Well except the Gnome linked ports, > because they always try to use bleeding edge code in Gnome...) In the ports tree, the default port follows the *current* source release. This is different from -STABLE versus -CURRENT. In the ports tree, if we need an old port, we create it without breaking the default behavior that ports follow the current source of the vendor. /Joe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D767EDD.2010207>