Why there is a newer OOo port than the binary?

[Nicolas Blais]

> > 2.0.4 is not officially released yet.
> > The one in the ports tree is a release
> > candidate. I assume a 2.0.4 binary will be made when 2.0.4 goes out of
> > RC. Anyway, there are problems with 2.0.4 so you are still better off
> > with 2.0.3 right now...
>
> Too me Okay, but the pkg-version output is annoying.
>
> Why the 2.0.4 canditate is allready in editors/openoffice.org-2.0?
>
> Shouldn't it be in editors/openoffice.org-2.0-devel? Then the
> portscollection and the installed package will be the same.
>
> Too mee it looks, that the OpenOffice.org port is the only one, who
> "breakes" with the convention between "XYZ" and "XYZ-devel" ports.
>
> Heino

Actually, it doesn't really break the convention. The openoffice-2.0-devel 
port is based on the latest OO source tree. This means that it's pointing 
towards 2.1. Since the source is always changing (in development), it would 
not be a good release candidate (for testing) prior to a 2.0.X release.

In simpler words, the RC are correctly put in openoffice-2.0 so that people 
(like me) can test and point out the problems of a frozen code tree (or 
release candidate) prior to the release of 2.0.X, contrary to -devel which is 
always in development.

Hope this explanation helps, 
Nicolas.

-- 
FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT #0: Sun Sep 17 10:21:02 EDT 2006     
nicblais at clk01a:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/CLK01A 
PGP? : http://www.clkroot.net/security/nb_root.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-openoffice/attachments/20060917/8f2ba9f0/attachment.pgp