RFC: What to do with Mozilla

[Paul Everlund]

Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 15:24, Philip Paeps wrote:
> 
>>Yes, that's true.  Expanding on the original braindump would be
 >>to use ports like www/mozilla14, www/mozilla15, www/mozilla16 and
 >>www/mozilla-firebird which refer to www/mozilla and set de correct
 >>pkgnamesuffix and build with the right knobs.
> 
> I think this would get cumbersome if we had to create a new mozillaX
> directory for each version.  I don't think it's necessary to have
 > every version in the tree forever.  Previously we tracked the vendor
> (ultra-stable) track, the stable track, and the development snapshot
> track.  The issue at hand is do we continue with three tracks, or is
 > two sufficient.

If version 1.(n+1) is out one maybe could come to the conclusion that
1.n isn't going to change very much, and hence just let it hang
around?

When I do visit my bank with my computer it does check if version 1.3
of mozilla is used (as that's the version they've tested). One could
hence not use either 1.4 or 1.5 or anything else 1.n. That's why it
might be important to have old versions around, as the bank doesn't
keep up the job by verifying usable web-browsers every time a new
version arrives.

How it's done, with knobs or by versioning the ports, that I do not
care about. :-)

[big snip]

Best regards,
Paul