Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 00:17:46 +0100 From: Cyrille Lefevre <cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: alane@geeksrus.net, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: lame > lame-devel Message-ID: <20030205231746.GC13772@gits.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20030204115854.65388cec.Alexander@Leidinger.net> References: <20030203134841.GA88265@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> <20030204115854.65388cec.Alexander@Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:58:54AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Mon, 3 Feb 2003 08:48:41 -0500 > "AlanE [admin]" <root@wwweasel.geeksrus.net> wrote: > > > Does anyone else find it strange that lame-devel is an older, somewhat > > broken port, when compared to lame? Maybe it should be retired and left > > to live out its golden years in the Attic. Just a thought... > > I expect a new beta version of LAME in some months (perhaps one or two). > Then lame-devel would be nice to have. I know we can bring it back to > life from the Attic, but wouldn't it be enough to mark it broken until > then? I've submited a PR asking for the deletion of lame-devel a few days ago since my previous emails to this ml where ignored... Cyrille. -- Cyrille Lefevre mailto:cyrille.lefevre@laposte.net 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?20030205231746.GC13772>