From owner-freebsd-gnome Tue Oct 1 16:23:51 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C34337B401 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 16:23:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (rdu57-17-158.nc.rr.com [66.57.17.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD01343E65 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 16:23:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) Received: from [10.2.1.2] (vpn-client-2.marcuscom.com [10.2.1.2]) by creme-brulee.marcuscom.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g91NJ6iv001662; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 19:19:06 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from marcus@marcuscom.com) Subject: Re: GNOME 2.1 upgrade From: Joe Marcus Clarke To: James Pole Cc: freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <1033513996.379.7.camel@saturn> References: <1033513054.343.16.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> <1033513996.379.7.camel@saturn> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 01 Oct 2002 19:23:30 -0400 Message-Id: <1033514610.343.32.camel@gyros.marcuscom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,TO_BE_REMOVED_REPLY version=2.41 Sender: owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 19:13, James Pole wrote: > On Wed, 2002-10-02 at 10:57, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > > What do people think of upgrading the GNOME 2 components to the > > just-released GNOME 2.1 versions? This is the development version that > > will become GNOME 2.2. This will involve updating components such as > > pango and gtk2. This may not be acceptable. > > > > Another alternative is to create -devel versions of the 2.1 components. > > Of course, this will create pains when upgrading. It should be noted > > that the 2.1 and upcoming 2.2 components will be _source and binary_ > > compatible with the 2.0 components. > > I suggest we create -devel versions, so people can continue using the > stable versions while developers can use the development versions. > > Most other ports follows this philosophy, so why not GNOME? The only reason I suggested the former was that we haven't made a release that uses GNOME 2 by default. The questions was more along the lines of do we have GNOME 2 track the 2.x train, or do we track releases? I could go either way. I just thought I'd get some opinions from the user base. Joe > > - James > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message > -- PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-gnome" in the body of the message