Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 16:16:52 -0800 (PST) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: Ville.Eerola@vehome.pp.sci.fi Cc: max@wide.ad.jp, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-ports@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/fetchmail Makefile ports/mail/fetchmail/filesmd5 Message-ID: <199612290016.QAA16189@baloon.mimi.com> In-Reply-To: <199612282149.XAA00485@h.ve.sci.fi> (message from Ville Eerola on Sat, 28 Dec 1996 23:49:00 %2B0200 (EET))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Well... I have somewhat mixed feelings about this. For the current * situation it is ok, but who knows what esr will do when we reach 2.9, * and we begin approaching fetchmail-3.0? Maybe it is best to do the * change now, and if the patchlevels start reappearing change it back * again. I thought about that too, but IMO we shouldn't have used the ".0" patchlevel anyway. We could have just used x.y, then x.y.1 and x.y.2 and so on if (and only if) the author starts adding patches (o' the day). Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612290016.QAA16189>