On 2008-02-04 11:27:24 -0600, Ryan Schmidt wrote: > Regarding the suggestion to rename all *-devel ports to *-latest, in > light of the above change, the name "latest" would indeed seem to be > clearer. It would also remove any potential confusion with the RPM - > devel packages, which IMHO would be quite a good thing.
I think this would be a good idea. > I guess this is as good a time as any to bring up the "tin" ports: > > $ port search ^tin$ ^tin- > tin news/tin 1.8.3 A threaded > NNTP and spool based UseNet newsreader > tin-devel news/tin-devel 1.7.10 A threaded > NNTP and spool based UseNet newsreader > tin-recent news/tin-recent 1.9.2 A Usenet > newsreader > $ > > Now, ignore the version numbers shown for a minute. Based on comments in > the header of "tin-recent" (copied below), it seems to be the > maintainer's intention (hey, that's you, Vincent!) that "tin" is the > latest released version, "tin-devel" is the latest development version, > and "tin-recent" is the more recent of the two. It looks like someone has > updated tin-recent but forgotten to update tin-devel. So, to match AFAIK, tin-devel is no longer maintained (and perhaps no longer used). > Vincent's new proposals, "tin-devel" gets deleted and "tin-recent" gets > renamed to "tin-latest", yes? +1 for this new policy. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
