Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 3 Apr 2002 15:28:41 +0300
From:      Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>
To:        Jonathan Chen <jonc@chen.org.nz>
Cc:        Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com>, Ernst de Haan <znerd@FreeBSD.ORG>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, java@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ANN: Jakarta Tomcat 4 now in www/jakarta-tomcat
Message-ID:  <20020403152841.A3094@straylight.oblivion.bg>
In-Reply-To: <20020403080557.A41726@grimoire.chen.org.nz>; from jonc@chen.org.nz on Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 08:05:57AM %2B1200
References:  <200204012215.AAA01615@smtp.hccnet.nl> <20020402180420.C39054@grimoire.chen.org.nz> <20020402162910.A550@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <20020402215517.A78205@grimoire.chen.org.nz> <20020402170749.J416@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20020403080557.A41726@grimoire.chen.org.nz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 08:05:57AM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 05:07:49PM +0300, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 09:55:17PM +1200, Jonathan Chen wrote:
>=20
> [...]
> > > There are 2 points I'd like to bring up with this:
> > >=20
> > >     1. Quite a few ports have the major-version appended to
> > >        their names. eg: qt, jdk, apache, gtk. Why not follow existing
> > >        convention?
> > >     2. It saves on the repo-copy when we move up to Tomcat 5.
> >=20
> > When you say 'it saves on the repo-copy', do you mean that there should
> > NOT be a repo-copy when we move up to Tomcat 5?
>=20
> What I'm suggesting is to rename jakarta-tomcat to jakarta-tomcat4.
> It saves on the bureaucracy involved when we have to do a repo-copy
> when we move to jakarta-tomcat5.
>=20
> >This is something that
> > I do not really agree with; repocopies are done to preserve a port's
> > history, and IMHO most of the Tomcat 5 port will still be based on
> > the Tomcat 4 one; thus, it should keep at least some of the Tomcat 4
> > port history.  Ergo, a repocopy *should* be done, at least IMHO :)
>=20
> The history is still there, it's in the tomcat3 port. tomcat4's
> history will still be in tomcat4 when we move to tomcat5. What you're
> suggesting just consumes disk-space, and doesn't gain us anything.

And at some point in the future, the tomcat3 port might be deleted,
and the history lost..  Also, having all the history in the port
facilitates greatly things like 'cvs annotate', especially with
relatively rapidly changing ports.

G'luck,
Peter

--=20
Peter Pentchev	roam@ringlet.net	roam@FreeBSD.org
PGP key:	http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint	FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E  DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
If there were no counterfactuals, this sentence would not have been paradox=
ical.

--BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjyq9XkACgkQ7Ri2jRYZRVPQeQCeNLKacDsKFwRGE/FvaC3ZQnqo
N0MAn0nRaJpDeAwoiVJdijlfnknBdiej
=iEWw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--BXVAT5kNtrzKuDFl--

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020403152841.A3094>