Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 15:24:24 -0400 From: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: What to do with Mozilla Message-ID: <2F7A3BB4-FF45-11D7-881B-003065ABFD92@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <1066244507.721.37.camel@gyros>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at 03:01 PM, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote: > On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 14:55, Charles Swiger wrote: >> Update www/mozilla to 1.5, but support 1.4 via a port named >> www/mozilla14 would provide backwards-compatibility in a fashion >> similar to other explicitly-versioned ports (squid, autoconf, python, >> etc). > > That's what mozilla-vendor used to be for. Why should we continue to > support 1.4.x? Do you have something that requires it? I don't have anything which requires Mozilla 1.4, no. I'm not sure we (you?) should continue to support 1.4.x. However, I see plenty of examples where multiple versions of a port are supported (for whatever reasons): 42-q% /bin/ls -d lang/python?? lang/gcc?? devel/automake?? devel/autoconf??? devel/autoconf213/ lang/gcc27/ lang/gcc34/ devel/autoconf253/ lang/gcc28/ lang/python15/ devel/autoconf257/ lang/gcc30/ lang/python20/ devel/automake14/ lang/gcc31/ lang/python21/ devel/automake15/ lang/gcc32/ lang/python22/ devel/automake17/ lang/gcc33/ ...and I find the name "www/mozilla14" to be more intuitive and descriptive than "www/mozilla-vendor", since the latter name I associate with Netscape-branding. YMMV, but thanks for your consideration. :-) -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2F7A3BB4-FF45-11D7-881B-003065ABFD92>