Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 23:50:18 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: Steve Price <steve@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Drew Sanford <lauasanf@bellsouth.net>, Dmitry Sivachenko <demon@FreeBSD.org>, ports@FreeBSD.org, asami@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Afterstep port Message-ID: <3A11B39A.250A7CE6@FreeBSD.org> References: <20001114114037.A46808@hub.freebsd.org> <3A11A425.584AA377@bellsouth.net> <20001114153613.G62344@bonsai.knology.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Price wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 02:44:21PM -0600, Drew Sanford wrote: > # Dmitry Sivachenko wrote: > # > > # > Hello! > # > > # > Is there any sense to keep x11-wm/afterstep port? > # > It represents an old 1.0 version, while the latest stable version is 1.8.4 > # > (afterstep-stable port). > # > > # > If there will be no objections, I propose to remove x11-wm/afterstep > # > and to repo-copy afterstep-stable -> afterstep. > # > # I personally think this is a bad idea, unless you plan to keep an > # afterstep 1.0 port somewhere. Its a simple, lightweight, very functional > # manager. Not being able to simply type 'make install' to add it to a new > # machine would severely increase the amount of typing I have to do to set > # up a new machine:) > > I'm with Drew on this one. I use AfterStep version 1.0 on all my > boxes and will continue to do so because: > > - It is stable. > - It is small. > - Has a single file to tweak configuration parameters. > - Doesn't require hundreds of other ports to be installed > before you can build or run it. The only additional > port (on top of X) is xpm and that is only a couple of > hundred kB. > - Doesn't require one to have a quad CPU bohemoth to run > like so many of the new window managers. > - It does everything I need. > > I vote we leave it in there. If it is in need of a MAINTAINER then > I'll do it. Need someplace to host the distfile, then I can do > that too. Surely there are plenty of other ports that constitute > really dead wood that you could pick on. Then we probably should move it to afterstep-old (or something like that) and rename afterstep-stable into afterstep to avoid confusion. -Maxim 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?3A11B39A.250A7CE6>