From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Oct  9 18:48:08 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA28517
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:48:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (wck-ca7-17.ix.netcom.com [204.31.231.49])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA28471;
          Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.7.6/8.6.9) id SAA07151; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:42:51 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:42:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199610100142.SAA07151@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: adam@veda.is
CC: adam@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: <199610092346.XAA00387@veda.is> (message from Adam David on Wed, 9 Oct 1996 23:46:52 +0000 (GMT))
Subject: Re: cvs commit:  ports/audio/rplay Makefile ports/audio/rplay/files md5 ports/audio/rplay/patches patch-aa patch-ab
From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * For instance, a port that is essentially the same over many revisions of the

In that case, please use something like

# Version required:     2.1 (up to patchlevel 8)

or

# Version required:     2.1 or 2.2

please!

This is just a comment, for christsakes.  I saw that you didn't update
the version comment when DISTNAME changed, and there is no way for me
or others to distinguish if that's just a mistake (as 99% of such
cases are) or it's intentional.

Satoshi