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 ...

[Adam Weinberger]

>> (08.11.2004 @ 1236 PST): Oliver Eikemeier said, in 0.7K: <<
> 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?
>> end of "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 ...

I think that when somebody goes to shells/bash, they'll expect to be
installing the latest "stable" version of bash. I think that if somebody
wants specifically to install an older version of bash, they can specify
shells/bash2.

I think that "NAME == current release; NAMEx == devel or old version" is
definitely what people will be expecting with version numbers.

The libxml/libxml2 split is a slightly different story. First of all, a
number of apps for GNOME 2 were officially named NAME2; libxml2 was one
of those. However, here maintaining the separation between GNOME 1 and
GNOME 2 was highly important, and it made more sense to clearly
differentiate versions and let people specifically install the gnome2
desktop. kde3 is the same concept, as is INDEX-5.

That being said, the FreeBSD/GNOME team is well aware that we should be
rolling things into NAME, not NAME2 ports. We would like to throw stuff
back, but the havoc it will cause makes the manoeuvre of questionable
value. Perhaps we will wait until GNOME 3, and put that into x11/gnome,
and let x11/gnome2 de-orbit inplace.

# Adam


--
Adam Weinberger
adamw at magnesium.net || adamw at FreeBSD.org
adamw at vectors.cx    ||   adamw at gnome.org
http://www.vectors.cx