Breaking Fox-toolkit down into fox10, fox12, fox14, etc?

Tom Nakamura imifumei at imap.cc
Sun Apr 10 02:55:03 PDT 2005


On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 02:36:20 -0700, "Kris Kennaway"
<kris at obsecurity.org> said:
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2005 at 02:21:35AM -0700, Tom Nakamura wrote:
> > I was thinking it would be a good idea to break down the fox-toolkit
> > into 'fox10', 'fox12', 'fox14', and (recently) 'fox15', instead of the
> > current 'fox' port (which tracks 1.0.x) and 'fox-devel' port (which
> > tracks 1.4.x). I say this because 
> > 1) 'fox' is rather old, and 'fox-devel' is the development branch which
> > is extremely new; having fox12 strikes a good balance;
> > 2) the current version of 'ruby-fox' (fxruby.org) is geared for
> > fox-1.2.x (which guarantees compatibiltiy), but instead with only a
> > 'fox' and 'fox-devel', ruby-fox builds with fox-1.4.x, which may
> > introduce incompatibilities. 
> > any thoughts?
> 
> Only the versions that are acually useful should be in the ports
> collection.  e.g. if no ports need fox 1.0, it shouldn't be kept.  I'd
> be surprised if there was a need for 4 distinct versions.
> 
> Kris

You haven't check how many tk ports there are recently, have you :-)?
Anyways, its mostly because developement on fox is extremely rapid, and
fxruby (uses 1.2.x) and fxpy (uses 1.0.x i think) can't keep up, so they
are still necessary; though 1.5.x is unneccesary, i think it would be a
good idea to have at least a fox12
tom
-- 
  
  eyefull at eml.cc



More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list